Is an understanding of mathematics all that relevant for game development anymore?

[Deleted member 12790]

I'm new to programming but what little experience I had tell me it's more logic base than mathematical?

I mean I get it that math is also logic base, I guess I just never got to the math part in programming?

Now if it was Engineering, I'll get it.

Click to shrink...

you use both. Logic is typically more for electrical engineering, but the lines can cross, especially if you're looking at optimization. For example, bit shifting -- the process of moving a bit string down like so:

This is a logical operation. But the end result of the logical operation is mathematical division or multiplication depending on the direction of the shift, in powers of 2. To understand why division or multipication arrives from this logical operation, and specifically how to use it to your advantage, you'll need to understand boolean algebra, two's compliment (if using negative numbers), and, of course, division, multiplication, and exponents.

The topics bleed into each other regularly. Like nearly everything in computer programming, it's a web of interconnected dependencies. To fully understand one area, you often need to understand multiple other subjects.

 

[mclem]

Just to add to all the graphics and directly programming-related discussion, it's probably worth mentioning that there's a reasonable amount of subtle mathematics in game design, pacing and balancing as well that can be overlooked. How long do you want a boss fight to last, how much damage is the player expected to be dealing out to make that happen? How much money should enemies drop to make the economy function, how much should upgrades cost to ensure a reasonable progression? What statistical boosts feel noticeable without being overpowered? If you can upgrade a gun to have triple the firing rate, is it still balanced? What's the probability of a collection of random events coinciding to make an unpleasant gaming experience? Is a new skill actually beneficial to the player, or is it a net decrease in power? Does a player MinMaxing completely break the game (and does that matter as far as you're concerned?)

One example of subtle mathematics which I like to cite is from one of the very early Scott Adams adventures, Adventureland, back in 1980. There's one puzzle which requires you to put bees into a bottle, carry them to a new location over several turns, then release them. Each turn, the bees have an 8% chance of suffocating, which will ultimately make the game unwinnable. I presume Scott thought that 8% was a good number to choose; high enough to discourage the player from holding them in the bottle permanently, low enough that a player who has a plan is extremely unlikely to trigger it.

However, it appears that Scott didn't take into account (or was possibly just cruel, that's always a possibility with early adventures!) the notion of cumulative probability; a player taking the fastest route necessary needs to keep the bees in the bottle for ten or eleven turns... which gives them only a 40% chance of survival! Doing everything perfectly, you still have less than a 50:50 chance of success! And as soon as the player has any inefficiencies in the route, that just gets worse and worse.

So, yes: Maths sneaks up on you. Be very careful about it.

Here's a collection of things I've written in the past; at the time it was in the context of accuracy in RPGs (and includes the Adventureland anecdote), but I think the mathematical thinking I bring up in it is a good frame of reference for the sorts of things that can catch you out.

 

[Elios83]

It's essential, if you don't want to bother with maths and also physics (because at this point all shading is done through physical principles) you can pretty much be just a creator learning to use tools and engines already available, basically an artist or a level designer.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

Just to add to all the graphics and directly programming-related discussion, it's probably worth mentioning that there's a reasonable amount of subtle mathematics in game design, pacing and balancing as well that can be overlooked. How long do you want a boss fight to last, how much damage is the player expected to be dealing out to make that happen? How much money should enemies drop to make the economy function, how much should upgrades cost to ensure a reasonable progression? What statistical boosts feel noticeable without being overpowered? If you can upgrade a gun to have triple the firing rate, is it still balanced? What's the probability of a collection of random events coinciding to make an unpleasant gaming experience? Is a new skill actually beneficial to the player, or is it a net decrease in power? Does a player MinMaxing completely break the game (and does that matter as far as you're concerned?)

One example of subtle mathematics which I like to cite is from one of the very early Scott Adams adventures, Adventureland, back in 1980. There's one puzzle which requires you to put bees into a bottle, carry them to a new location over several turns, then release them. Each turn, the bees have an 8% chance of suffocating, which will ultimately make the game unwinnable. I presume Scott thought that 8% was a good number to choose; high enough to discourage the player from holding them in the bottle permanently, low enough that a player who has a plan is extremely unlikely to trigger it.

However, it appears that Scott didn't take into account (or was possibly just cruel, that's always a possibility with early adventures!) the notion of cumulative probability; a player taking the fastest route necessary needs to keep the bees in the bottle for ten or eleven turns... which gives them only a 40% chance of survival! Doing everything perfectly, you still have less than a 50:50 chance of success! And as soon as the player has any inefficiencies in the route, that just gets worse and worse.

So, yes: Maths sneaks up on you. Be very careful about it.

Here's a collection of things I've written in the past; at the time it was in the context of accuracy in RPGs (and includes the Adventureland anecdote), but I think the mathematical thinking I bring up in it is a good frame of reference for the sorts of things that can catch you out.

Click to shrink...

This is why I recommend reading a book on probability and statistics. They'll help you design better higher concept systems.

 

[Deleted member 61326]

All great developers I have met (and this is not in game development) have had great understanding of mathematics and computer science in general.

 

[Midas]

You can absolutely make games these days without advanced math skills due to available tools. It all depends on how advanced things are supposed to be.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

All great developers I have met (and this is not in game development) have had great understanding of mathematics and computer science in general.

Click to shrink...

It should be repeated, however, that there are very few true math savants in the world, relatively speaking. Most people who have a great understanding of math weren't born with it. If you were, you're hyper lucky, but most gained that knowledge through experimentation and studying.

That's actually reassuring to me, personally, because I was not born with a great understanding of math. But knowing that one can become great at math through hard work encourages me.

 

[Heynongman!]

I'm new to programming but what little experience I had tell me it's more logic base than mathematical?

I mean I get it that math is also logic base, I guess I just never got to the math part in programming?

Now if it was Engineering, I'll get it.

Click to shrink...

The difference between programming software and games is that games use a lot of positional data that requires math to work with. While engines like Unity do the heavy lifting, you still need a solid base knowledge of which math functions to use and when, and knowing how they work can keep you from hitting walls of frustration.

There are certainly software dev projects that require math knowledge too, but for simplicity's sake we'll just pretend they're different things.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

Let me give an example of a type of math one might not realize they need in a video form that's fun to watch:



Now, it is certainly true, and has been true for decades, that there are multiple RNG libraries out there. But knowing how they work, exposes their faults and weaknesses. Being able to design your own RNG, with a specific distribution and frequency, is really useful if you want to tweak and fine tune at a higher fidelity.

EDIT: This is probably very advanced for OP, but still give it a try to watch, even if you don't understand it all.

 

[Puru]

I tried UNity for a bit and i found myself using math related stuff i had not much idea about in no time and i'm just assuming it get worse the more you dig into it. It was "fine" because the tools were already implemented for the simple stuff i was trying to do , the engine has tons of ressource you can find or examples of code, but i since i don't really like not understanding what i'm typing i had to check things out. I assumed it only went worse the further you dig into it.
That said it was a really nice experience and probably the most fun i had coding.

 

[Myself]

You're asking "How long is a piece of string". Some jobs will require it more (If you're a 3d Engine programmer for instance, or maybe writing some modelling or simulation) and some *maybe* less, if you're a game subsystem programmer, or programming character mechanics etc. I am a games programmer but I would not call myself great at maths. There are probably times where that's been a hurdle when I've been tasked with something complex to solve, but you can often then rely on the work of others in those situations - there is lots of information and already-solved problems out there. However, I would say you'll at least need a rudimentary understanding of vector arithmetic like dot products, cross products and things, as well as understanding of transformations. You'll use that stuff for so many things.

Other than that, it really is game and domain specific IMO.

 

[Rosenkrantz]

For programmers? Absolutely. Designers, art team, writers? Have no idea, it's probably a nice bonus, but less important than other things.

 

[WillyGubbins]

you shouldn't be curt with people who are starting out. Assume questions asked are in good faith, even if you think they might sound very misinformed. When I was just beginning graphics development, I got laughed out of a room full of C developers at a PC users group, and it hurts 25 years later. When people ask for help, they're exposing themselves to you and are being vulnerable, they're trusting you for guidance. Don't betray that trust. You look way cooler offering a helping hand than scoffing at a "ridiculous" question (and, IMO, there are no ridiculous questions, everyone starts somewhere).

Click to shrink...

Well said :)

 

[Akela]

Even the game art side of development can involve a fair amount of maths depending on what you're doing - stuff like procedural modelling/texturing, shaders, character rigging, etc. Even if a lot of it is abstracted into visual node graphs from the artist's perspective nowadays.

"Understanding of mathamatics" is a really broad statement. The level of maths (and programming) knowledge required to construct some stylized water shader in Unity's shader graph or a procedural 3D model in something like Houdini is completely different from the level required for say, engine development, but they both ultimately require some amount of knowledge in the end.

 

[werezompire]

It really depends. As someone who programs 2D turn-based JRPGs using Unity, I haven't need much beyond what I learned in high school (plus a decent understanding of probabilities from playing other RPGs).

 

[Deleted member 12790]

For programmers? Absolutely. Designers, art team, writers? Have no idea, it's probably a nice bonus, but less important than other things.

Click to shrink...

you'll without a doubt use lots of geometry as a 3D artist, at least. 3D art is geometry.

Math can creep up on your in unexpected ways. Like, for example, how to mathematically center something on screen. That might sound simple, and to some it undoubtedly is, but I doubt many non-programmers or non-artists have to think about how to do something like that regularly.

Given the width of a larger bounding box, and the width of an object, how would one center that object within the larger box? I challenge OP to figure out how to do that, it's a pretty good example of how math permeates development. Even with the tools available to you in many engines, you'll still find yourself having to calculate things like this.

 

[WeAreStarStuff]

Hmmm this thread made me curious. Is there a lot of stats in game programming/development? I do a lot of machine learning/ai coding, but the 'math' is nearly entirety statistics - at least for what I do: predictive modeling.

 

[mute]

Even if there are positions where it is used less or modern tools have new features that assist you, if you seek out a degree any school is going to require you to take math classes to satisfy a general level of competency.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

Hmmm this thread made me curious. Is there a lot of stats in game programming/development? I do a lot of machine learning/ai coding, but the 'math' is nearly entirety statistics - at least for what I do: predictive modeling.

Click to shrink...

yes, very much so. Much of "gameplay" is statistics and probability.

 

[Calabi]

You can absolutely make games these days without advanced math skills due to available tools. It all depends on how advanced things are supposed to be.

Click to shrink...

Yep I'm no good at maths and have made and done a few things in Unity. There's lots of helper functions and short cut methods and tutorials that help you. Like Quaternions are quite easy to use without having to understand the underlying math. I even managed to make and manipulate Bezier curves without even understand the underlying math for it. I just got the math equation that created them and then plugged that into my method.

The problem I have now though is I'm using a new paradigm ECS which doesn't have many of the shortcut methods and tutorials so I do kind of need to know and understand matrices to manipulate things so yeah I would recommend you learn some of the basic stuff like others have mentioned its not really that hard.

 

[WeAreStarStuff]

yes, very much so. Much of "gameplay" is statistics and probability.

Click to shrink...

Sounds lovely. I appreciate your reply.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

Sounds lovely. I appreciate your reply.

Click to shrink...

Here's an excellent video that is, without a doubt, up your alley, from the classic DOOM:

 

[Irrotational]

I actually disagree. I believe math is like a language, and there is a critical period where young people can learn it much easier. Math is like art, it's best understood when you can feel it out and see the relationship between numbers. Math is logical, it's beautiful when understood. The earlier you learn these subjects, the better you innately understand how it's all connected.

That's not to say older people can't learn complex subjects, I've been playing catch up my entire life. But I think it's not the right approach to wall off higher level maths till late in life.

The root of it all is what you say, though: we teach math as a science, so it's mechanical. Math should be taught as an art. An excellent read on the subject: https://www.maa.org/external_archive/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf

Click to shrink...

I'll have a look but my initial reaction was that I strongly disagree. I loved/love maths and disliked virtually every "arts" subject I ever did, from english to geography to actual painting and crafting.

Over time I've realised quite how narrow a mindset that is! but Maths is fundamentally different from art subjects.

Pure maths is 100% about logic, repeatability, proof etc. You pick 1 or 2 starting axioms and off you go, you figure everything else out from logic and prove things.*

Using mathematical techniques, that have already been proved, to actually do stuff is not really maths...it's just complicated numeracy and/or coding.

Taking matrix multiplication as an example... learning about it is part of an education about what maths can do, and techniques you might use elsewhere to prove/understand new bits of maths....so it might count as "maths". Someone learning the technique and then doing a few examples and then using it in computer code isn't doing maths, they're doing algorithms and turning them into code.


*I'm still very upset about Godel - damn him!

 

[Nitpicker_Red]

It realy depends on what you think games are.

If you think games are a "medium" over which you express your ideas, then you can just pick a genre, follow a recipe and fill in with custom contents and story.


For some people, games are more like interactive systems, and the maths part IS the POINT of making a game. The innovation IS the meaning of creativity. The game itself is the idea, the guts, the raw material.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

The problem I have now though is I'm using a new paradigm ECS which doesn't have many of the shortcut methods and tutorials so I do kind of need to know and understand matrices to manipulate things so yeah I would recommend you learn some of the basic stuff like others have mentioned its not really that hard.

Click to shrink...

Just to help you on your path towards gaining a better understanding, ECS really has nothing to do with mathematics. ECS describes how objects in memory are laid out, it's a method of organization and memory management, as opposed to "natural" Object Oriented Programming. it sounds like you are having trouble picking up linear algebra. If you go looking for tutorials on entity component systems, you won't find much help for what is confusing you. I recommend the book I posted earlier: https://www.amazon.com/Math-Primer-Graphics-Game-Development/dp/1568817231

That will teach you what you want to know. Now, understanding how ECS works is cool, but that's actually something that is more in line with the OP's topic title. you don't really need to know how it works to use it at all, unless you really, really want to get down and dirty.

EDIT: Just to add a little bit more, if you are interested in how ECS works conceptually, it's a method of classification and organization for objects. The easiest way to think about it, for the benefit of this board, is that ECS works like the materia system in Final Fantasy VII. The buster sword is an "entity," it is merely an object with slots that can hold components (materia). Without those components, the sword is empty, and rote. But as you 'attach' components to the sword, the properties of the sword change. Attach a lightning materia to the sword, and suddenly it's a lightning sword. Attach an all materia to as well, and suddenly it's a lightning sword that attacks all. All permutations of that sword with different types of materia are swords, but they're not different swords. there is only one buster sword, and what we define that sword as can change.

This is in comparison to a "pure" Object Oriented Programming design, where objects are supposed to descend in a heirarchy. Under that model, we'd have a class called sword, and a "lightning sword" would be a type of sword, that is physically different than a "lightning-all sword." those would be two completely different swords.

The benefit of ECS is encapsulation and comparison. you can say "use a buster sword" and you're referring to all swords with every type of materia being spoken about. OOP heirarchies can work similarly, but you can run into problems of specificity. Under ECS, I could say "use a lightning sword" and the "lighting-all sword" might satisfy that requirement. Under "pure" OOP, depending on how you structure your heirarchy, a "lightning-all sword" might not be technically the same thing as a "lightning sword." The relationship between objects in OOP is called an "is-a" relationship, as in you, the programmer, have to specifically define every relationship. ECS lets you programmatically define relationships in a much more natural an obvious way.

This is all a super, suuuuuuper simplified explaination with a ton of nuance left out, but that should give you a very broad understanding of what ECS is trying to achieve. It all, obviously, get much more complex (and we haven't even talked about how this is implemented... and to be extra confusing, Unity's "ECS" technically isn't "ECS" lol)

 

[hwarang]

There ought to be a community OT related to game development and mathematics. The official Math OT is literally dead or nearly ignored altogether into oblivion.

 

[Deleted member 37739]

Just listen to Sean Murray talking about trying to plot quest markers and way points on the surface of a spherical object, half way across a galaxy, with three giant planets in between...

 

[Wise]

My computer science course is heavy in mathematics so I would say yes?

 

[Raysoul]

This is why I really try to appreciate every game I play.

I am an IT graduate, but I suck at math. The number of systems, logic, math, and other things that makes that video game that you play isn't easy to make.

I have tried making some small games before, and for even simple ones, you need some knowledge in Algebra to create one.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

I'll have a look but my initial reaction was that I strongly disagree. I loved/love maths and disliked virtually every "arts" subject I ever did, from english to geography to actual painting and crafting.

Over time I've realised quite how narrow a mindset that is! but Maths is fundamentally different from art subjects.

Pure maths is 100% about logic, repeatability, proof etc. You pick 1 or 2 starting axioms and off you go, you figure everything else out from logic and prove things.*

Using mathematical techniques, that have already been proved, to actually do stuff is not really maths...it's just complicated numeracy and/or coding.

Taking matrix multiplication as an example... learning about it is part of an education about what maths can do, and techniques you might use elsewhere to prove/understand new bits of maths....so it might count as "maths". Someone learning the technique and then doing a few examples and then using it in computer code isn't doing maths, they're doing algorithms and turning them into code.


*I'm still very upset about Godel - damn him!

Click to shrink...

The link I posted makes the argument I'd be trying to make much more eloquently, so I'll just say read that link. Obviously, it's impossible to disagree that math is the realm of logic, but there is art in understanding the relationship between values. It's better to learn those the same way one learns any artistic skill, though curiosity, experimentation, and play. For me at least, that has been absolutely the case. Rote, mechanical memorization of axioms doesn't stick, I need to see how one piece of the puzzle affects the other in my head.

I've said this in the past, but when I do computer programming, and the type of math I use in computer programming, in my head, it looks like tetris. It's fitting specifically shaped "pieces" into specifically shaped "holes." I make the pieces, I make the hole. It feels very much like drawing. Again, just personally.

 

[Encephalon]

I think unity and UE4 are great tools (literally the best in the industry) for development, but for beginners I'd recommend getting as far away from those kinds of tools as possible. I started with hypercard:



Then moved onto BASIC. WYSIWYG editors are great because they let you intuitively see the relationships between values. My go-to recommendation for beginners has been the Petite Computer series on Nintendo consoles. SmileBasic4, the latest release, is excellent at easing people into things.

Click to shrink...

Edit:

I just picked this up December of last year, but all of the guides etc online are for Smile Basic 3 for the Wii U and 3DS, which is different from 4. There is also a http://smilebasic.com/, that is still oriented around the 3DS/Wii U version of the language. It's really disappointing.

 

[Rosenkrantz]

you'll without a doubt use lots of geometry as a 3D artist, at least. 3D art is geometry.

Math can creep up on your in unexpected ways. Like, for example, how to mathematically center something on screen. That might sound simple, and to some it undoubtedly is, but I doubt many non-programmers or non-artists have to think about how to do something like that regularly.

Given the width of a larger bounding box, and the width of an object, how would one center that object within the larger box? I challenge OP to figure out how to do that, it's a pretty good example of how math permeates development. Even with the tools available to you in many engines, you'll still find yourself having to calculate things like this.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, this is definitely a good example.

I wonder how much math involved in a work of designer? As someone outside of the industry I always imagined it to be more akin to filmmaking where director has a basic understanding of technical limitations and comes up with a lot of creative things in how to shoot the scene, but usually depends on other people (cinematographers, editors) to execute their vision. Is it similar in video games?

 

[THANKS]

But with the majority of games from indie to AAA relying done on engines where everything from lighting to particle effects is already there for you, is it even all that necessary to understand how it's working underneath these days?

Click to shrink...

Your question is sincere but this is so far from the truth. There's a whole suite of dev roles (rendering engineer and technical artist) where the whole job is to come up with the tech to support the creation of new lighting techniques or visual effects. Most AAA companies use their own engines, and who do you think is creating, updating and advancing those engines? Even in Unreal, some companies will expand the tech to create new rendering or vfx techniques.

 

[Deleted member 61326]

It should be repeated, however, that there are very few true math savants in the world, relatively speaking. Most people who have a great understanding of math weren't born with it. If you were, you're hyper lucky, but most gained that knowledge through experimentation and studying.

That's actually reassuring to me, personally, because I was not born with a great understanding of math. But knowing that one can become great at math through hard work encourages me.

Click to shrink...

I feel I should reword my phrasing slightly. I should replace "great understanding of" to "were interested in". I did not mean to imply that they were savants in any way or form, but to at least from my experience I can see a correlation between "great developer" and "interested in / not afraid of mathematics and computer science".

 

[Deleted member 12790]

I just picked this up December of last year, but all of the guides etc online are for Smile Basic 3 for the Wii U and 3DS, which is different from 4. There is also a smilebasic . com or something like that, that is still oriented around the Wii U version last I checked.

Click to shrink...

I'm afraid I can't recommend any specific tutorials for the switch version, sorry, but I think there is an OT somewhere on this site. One thing to remember: to a large degree, BASIC is meant to be interoperable. So much of those tutorials you see online should apply to multiple versions of Smile BASIC.

 

[Xenor]

I am making 2D games for many years and I barely needed any math at all. Just the basic stuff. Don't know how it is with 3D though.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

Yeah, this is definitely a good example.

I wonder how much math involved in a work of designer? As someone outside of the industry I always imagined it to be more akin to filmmaking where director has a basic understanding of technical limitations and comes up with a lot of creative things in how to shoot the scene, but usually depends on other people (cinematographers, editors) to execute their vision. Is it similar in video games?

Click to shrink...

Depends on how you work. Like, ok, camera control in a game. You can mathematically calculate out a dolly shot in a game using weighted bezier curves, or linear interpolation (or spherical linear interpolation if constant velocity is important), or any number of scenarios. Or, if you're a hands on person, you could say screw that, attach an in game camera's controller component to a hand tracked VR controller, and just trace the path you want IRL with your hands (which is like how James Cameron worked on Avatar).

You'll probably run into math at some point, though, even if you try to avoid it as much as possible.

 

[Irrotational]

The link I posted makes the argument I'd be trying to make much more eloquently, so I'll just say read that link. Obviously, it's impossible to disagree that math is the realm of logic, but there is art in understanding the relationship between values. It's better to learn those the same way one learns any artistic skill, though curiosity, experimentation, and play. For me at least, that has been absolutely the case. Rote, mechanical memorization of axioms doesn't stick, I need to see how one piece of the puzzle affects the other in my head.

I've said this in the past, but when I do computer programming, and the type of math I use in computer programming, in my head, it looks like tetris. It's fitting specifically shaped "pieces" into specifically shaped "holes." I make the pieces, I make the hole. It feels very much like drawing. Again, just personally.

Click to shrink...

Very interesting - thanks. You would probably be very good at geometric branches of Maths - i was terrible at those!

I once did a Groups/Rings pure maths course where you could prove the same result three ways, algebra, logic and geometric. I could not understand the geometric method for the life of me.

I definitely think people should learn through curiosity, experimentation and play....for anything and everything - so maybe I agree with you! Teaching mathematical techniques is IMHO bad on two fronts 1. it is quite boring and rote - it's taught as a set of arbitrary rules that just exist. 2. people are never taught the difference between numeracy, algorithms, and logic/deduction.

They never ever get to see the "why" of anything.

Appreciate your posts in this thread - some really interesting answers from someone who has clearly got a lot of experience.

 

[Buff Beefbroth]

I think unity and UE4 are great tools (literally the best in the industry) for development, but for beginners I'd recommend getting as far away from those kinds of tools as possible. I started with hypercard:

Click to shrink...

Goddamn. HyperCard and making games with it was my LIFE as a kid.

(Reliance on math is why my "game development career" never progressed past that point.)

 

[EVIL]

A few good replies so far that I want to say thank you all for, but I'm picking out this one in particular because of the multiple good examples and advice on what I should look into on my own because I'm very interested.

Maybe I framed my OP in the wrong way, but what I was more getting at is what is the mileage these days in being able to do this? Of course as any level of graphics or physics programmer I'd expect someone to be intimately familiar with all topics and issues you mentioned.

But, and I am speaking from a position of ignorance so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like if I asked this question 10-15 years ago everything you said would be completely as true today as it is then, and that needing someone doing that would be completely obvious, while "these days" from what I have personally observed in the indie scene (particularly in the case of the 'one man band' another poster used) there seem to be a lot of people I am very certain are not experts in this field but achieving respectable results - I imagine using the already implemented rendering, collision detection, and so on of modern game engines and basically 'plugging in' their own scripting on top of that.

Click to shrink...

I am fairly sure each of those people have basic high-school level of math. no matter how much plug an play you are trying to get for your game, at some point you will hit a roadblock and have to think outside the box and have to solve a problem yourself and I can assure you, having basic math knowledge will help you there. Again you dont need to be an expert, but to have highschool level of math under your belt is a huge assist in helping you figure out problems

 

[azeke]

If you're unwilling to learn -- you're unwilling to work.

 

[Deleted member 12790]

Very interesting - thanks. You would probably be very good at geometric branches of Maths - i was terrible at those!

Click to shrink...

Trigonometry is actually my strongest math subject. I said I didn't innately grasp mathematics, and that's true, but the relationship between, like, SIN and COSINE and how they apply to a circle, once I saw it in action, I got it very quickly.

I definitely think people should learn through curiosity, experimentation and play....for anything and everything - so maybe I agree with you! Teaching mathematical techniques is IMHO bad on two fronts 1. it is quite boring and rote - it's taught as a set of arbitrary rules that just exist. 2. people are never taught the difference between numeracy, algorithms, and logic/deduction.

Click to shrink...

Please read that link, I think you'd like it. I have a feeling you'll think it is preaching to the choir when you're done. I post that essay a lot, because it really, really resonates with me. It sums up all the problems I personally had with formal math education.

 

[Grenchel]

What is the general consensus on something like blueprints in UE4? I have started using it for film work and am considering trying to make a small game to learn the engine. I have no programming/math background.

I have read it has some fairly big limitations?

 

[Encephalon]

I'm afraid I can't recommend any specific tutorials for the switch version, sorry, but I think there is an OT somewhere on this site.

Click to shrink...

Sorry, I was a bit too quick to post.

That's quite alright. I'm not asking you to come to the rescue. Just mentioning that it's a little frustrating to see an official Smile Basic site based on the older version of the platform. Here's a sample of it, albeit it's in Japanese.

SmileBASIC 講座_2.計算で遊ぶ

プログラム初心者でも楽しめる「SmileBASIC 講座」開講!

smilebasic.com

The Puchicon 4 site has a "wiki" of sorts that is, well it has the same problem you mentioned with Wikipedia. It's more of a list of functions* than a learning resource. I guess they intended it for 4 to be either

1. An education tool where programmers would use it to teach ES kids and do the heavy lifting
2. Expect the audience to create comprehensive resources themselves.

Had Smile Basic itself not changed, it would probably be easy to just keep learning via the Wii U/3DS version, but there are apparently some key differences.

*Not literally "functions."

 

[Deleted member 12790]

Goddamn. HyperCard and making games with it was my LIFE as a kid.

(Reliance on math is why my "game development career" never progressed past that point.)

Click to shrink...

early on, I made Final Fantasy style RPGs in hypercard using the HyperTalk API to simulate dice rolls behind the scenes. I would link button presses to animations that would play depending on the outcome of the dice rolls, and the animations would themselves trigger other dice rolls to calculate out the damage, hit rate, etc. Very, very fond memories of that.

 

[Dreamboum]

I'm so scared of math like you wouldn't believe. I tried to learne basic discrete maths and it kicked my ass. Not so much the discrete aspect but how it meshes with "actual math" (idk what it's called i'm sorry). I can understand the logic well enough.
Matrices I could understand at first...then i had to use matrices with geometry or whatever and i tuned tf out. That shit is too advanced. There was that part where I had to make hypotheses and it was like..wtf
only thing I managed to insert in my head was graph in discrete math. Vertices? Edges? Directed? Undirected? That shit was fun
but the rest was beyond me, I cried myself to sleep trying to understand that stuff

 

[Deleted member 12790]

What is the general consensus on something like blueprints in UE4? I have started using it for film work and am considering trying to make a small game to learn the engine. I have no programming/math background.

I have read it has some fairly big limitations?

Click to shrink...

Blueprints looks how computer programming looks in my head, in the most literal sense.

There are limitations with blueprints, but that comes down to some things being too abstract for a WYSIWYG editor.

 

[s0l0kill]

You can build a game without knowing proper math, but you're going to be in a serious disadvantage when you're going to try to do anything custom, programming and math are the bread and butter of serious game dev and 3d work, it's used in everything from rendering, shading, rigging and even animation.
Engines like UE4 give us great tools but there will come a time when you'll want to have a special material, or a special way to lerp between blendshapes etc etc, then the need will show itself, and while there's a lot of resources online, I find myself missing things all the time.

 

[Encephalon]

By the way, I think it's worth saying that Krejlooc is an absolute treasure. What informative, interesting, and helpful posts. Thank you for all of the contributions you make to this community.

 

[Deleted member 23850]

It's why I would have pretty much bombed my only game design class, if it weren't for the professing being nice enough to run me through all my assignments. Game coding is maddeningly frustrating because fuck math.