1000 objects

[Geoff Canyon]

I'm assuming you're drawing something like face-down playing cards.  
If the appearance is always the same, another way to handle something  
like this would be to have one graphic instead of many, calculate  
where the click occurred and then do what is appropriate based on that.

As far as really nice graphics go -- hire Scott ;-)

gc

On May 27, 2005, at 8:04 PM, Shari wrote:

>> It seems unlikely that a player is going to be able to interact  
>> with 142
>> separate objects at one time on their screen, much less 1000.  I  
>> wonder if
>> they would even fit on the screen, if your game contains  
>> environmental art
>> (card table, other players, etc).  But assuming there was space, I  
>> would say
>> it's up to you to effectively manage what players have access to,  
>> and to use
>> representations of groups of chips when appropriate.  If a players  
>> stacks 10
>> chips, you replace the stack of 10 objects with a single "chip stack"
>> object.  If the player wants to play with the chips separately,  
>> maybe they
>> have to place the "stack" on the table (or whatever is  
>> appropriate).  This
>> requires some efficiency planning on your part.
>>
>> Just because you *can* have access to 1000 objects/chips doesn't  
>> mean you
>> *have* to make them separate objects.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Scott Rossi
>>
>
> Actually it fits very well :-)  I had the same issue when I changed  
> how I approached the cards.  I had to have 416 objects for the  
> cards, representing 8 decks times 52 cards.  The original version  
> didn't do it that way, but a recent upgrade did.  You don't believe  
> one could use that many cards at once?  Well, seven players times  
> multiple hands per player times multiple cards per hand... plus the  
> dealer... can add up to a lot of cards.
>
> And it isn't up to me, this particular version upgrade is about  
> beating out the competitors.  There are quite a few competitors  
> that have come into this, and from a marketing perspective, if I  
> don't compete, I am dead in the water.
>
> From a marketing perspective there are two ways to approach it:
>
> 1.  You give them more bang for the buck.  If there are 10 programs  
> each selling for the same price, yours better have more goodies  
> than the other 9.
>
> 2.  You drop the price and hope they don't want those goodies bad  
> enough to pay your competitors the extra bucks.
>
> I'm competing with not only other shareware authors and retail  
> games, but now the casinos have jumped into it and have put out  
> freebie versions.  As this game is my bread and butter of software  
> sales, either it grows or dies.  Man, the graphics of one of the  
> competitors just blows me out of the water.  So I'm stuffing this  
> version with every danged possible option anybody could want, and  
> one last tweak of the graphics... the chips.  And even then it will  
> be missing things others have.  Geez, there are so many things I  
> can put into this thing.  The list never runs out.  But even so it  
> will have things others are missing.  So I guess it's all about  
> what's most important to those spending their money.
>
> If you've ever gambled, it's pretty big watching those chips either  
> stack up or dwindle away.  The visual aspect of it ... pretty big.  
> So visually the chips are going to be just as if it were a real  
> casino... chips stacking up, if the stack gets a certain height the  
> chips will color up...
>
> The game itself doesn't slow down for the additional overhead, just  
> Metacard itself when the Control Browser is open.  Actually I take  
> that back, I haven't finished the coding to play the game in its  
> newest incarnation :-)  But I don't think it will slow the game down.
>
> I have a memory card I've never installed, maybe it's time to go  
> from 128 MB RAM to 256... (yup, I'm in the dark ages as usual....)
>
> Shari
> -- 
> Mac and Windows shareware games
> http://www.gypsyware.com
> _______________________________________________
> metacard mailing list
> metacard at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
>
>