As our submissions are pretty close, may I ask you if you did sound effects in games? I was not able to support this in my entry at this time (I can't do pre-loaded sounds and have to emulate target platform's sound chip), so I wonder if you were able to support this.
Alexander On Apr 30, 6:01 am, tberthel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why would a judge or user want something that does not work on the > OMAP 3XXX? > > Do you really think a great 3D game that is unplayable is better that > a crappy 2D game that is fun? > > Still you fail to meet the mark of: > > "Name one game that has all the features I listed then you might have > an argument. Name 10 games with the same features then you I will say > your correct." > > I showcase the most Android features for a game library. Since I am > simply the only one with a game that uses them it doesn't matter that > much how great they are as long as I have them and know one else > does. > > So, while the features are not earth shattering they do not exist in > another library that will become open if I win. > > If I described my poker hand using your analogy I have a four of a > kind of 2's. How many hands really beat four of a kind I think it's > better than 50 of 1766 ie 1/36? Is it really that unique of a hand. > Well no, but having it when others don't is an automatic win. :) > > Full House > probability:http://www.durangobill.com/Poker_Probabilities_5_Cards.html > > On Apr 29, 12:43 pm, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> tberthel, > > > I think we are looking at this competition from a completely opposite > > viewpoint. You say you are making a highly compatible application > > because most phones are old, and that will be the status quo for a > > while. That is completely true, but the competition is forward > > looking; they want applications that won't work on older handsets! If > > this were a generic mobile application developer challenge it would be > > another story... > > > You also ask for a list of other applications that have all the same > > features yours does. As others have pointed out, this isn't about > > quantity. From a statistical standpoint, it is very unlikely that > > another application will have all the same features as yours, just as > > your application doesn't have all the same features as mine. More > > features doesn't necessarily equate with a better application, > > especially when the features are relatively generic like "vibration" > > and "progress bars". Your argument is like saying a worthless > > pokerhand is special because the odds of you getting that hand were 1 > > in a million. To emphasize, I'm not saying your application is at all > > worthless, just that your argument that you have a high chance of > > winning because no one else is using the same features as you is > > flawed. > > > But on that note, perhaps I'm not fully understanding how your > > features are showcasing the Android platform. Would you mind > > discussing why each features is specifically compelling? > > > I guess we'll have the definitive answer next though! BTW, I'm > > expecting bad news about our own team's results; with 1,788 entries > > the odds are stacked against all of us regardless of our quality. If > > the two of us lose I'll buy us both a beer to commiserate our defeat - > > if you win I expect that it will be on you! > > > On Apr 29, 10:01 am, tberthel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Name one game that has all the features I listed then you might have > > > an argument. Name 10 games with the same features then you I will say > > > your correct. > > > > Until then your are full of it. > > > > Both you and Chris need to look at the competition. They still have > > > not done what I have listed yet. I am sure they will but they haven't > > > yet until then you're spreading fud. > > > > I don't know what Samsung your using, but it's not running Android so > > > what is the point until someone has what I have now on Android. > > > > When a better device/emulator comes out I will break out the > > > multiplayer and 3D. My submission is the best your going to get on > > > the OMAP 34XX which will be the majority of the phones for a while. > > > Still the emulator is much faster than any phone I have had and that > > > goes with most of the USA. So expecting every phone to have a Power VR > > > and speed like your Samsung if it really is that powerful are still > > > rare. > > > > On Apr 29, 7:06 am, Hielko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > tberthel: I understand that you think that you're application is very > > > > cool, and that you are defensive when someone else doesn't (fully) > > > > share your opinion, but I agree completely with Chris. You have some > > > > cool games, but it isn't really special. There just the same type of > > > > games I can run on my 2 year old simple Samsung phone. Implementing > > > > stuff like progress bars/dialogs, touch screen, vibrations, the > > > > lifecycle model etc etc is not really android specfic stuff. Every > > > > half decent Android application will have those features. > > > > > I would be very suprised if your games, and similair games, would make > > > > it to the top 50: simple because there is little innovation. Games > > > > like Wifi Army or Parallel Kingdoms will have a far better probability > > > > to make it in the top 50. > > > > > That said: I hope for you that the judges don't share my opinion :) > > > > > On Apr 29, 11:25 am, tberthel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Every APK has the Manifest and the others are, "other Android-specific > > > > > components" which includes my whole list. So, I think I meet the > > > > > "CowBay Standard". > > > > > > On Apr 28, 11:33 pm, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Ho, but you are not implementing the ones below: > > > > > > > >take for examples Android Intent, LBS, content provider, > > > > > > >AndroidManifests.xml, Services, and other Android-specific > > > > > > >components, which > > > > > > >are seldomly seen in other mobile platforms, not to mention those > > > > > > >android-specific api "constraints". > > > > > > > CowBay says that if you are not implementing those than you've > > > > > > failed > > > > > > criteria 2. Based on your list above seems to me like you've > > > > > > failed. :) > > > > > > > I'm just messing with you. I was being sarcastic with CowBay. > > > > > > I also implemented all the features you listed above except > > > > > > Orientation . It just doesn't make sense that every single > > > > > > application > > > > > > has to have LBS, or use content provider or Services. Some > > > > > > applications simply do not require this features. So no, I don't > > > > > > think > > > > > > that just because you did not implement these three things that it > > > > > > necessarily means that you failed criteria two. > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 11:59 pm, tberthel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Can you think of a submission that uses more Android features than > > > > > > > mine? > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 10:58 pm, tberthel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I probably have the most performant and processing intensive > > > > > > > > use of > > > > > > > > the Android Platform showing the most effective use of the > > > > > > > > platforms > > > > > > > > 2D graphics capabilities. I also use compelling features > > > > > > > > including the > > > > > > > > following: > > > > > > > > > * Vibration > > > > > > > > * Orientation > > > > > > > > * Animations > > > > > > > > * Touch Screen > > > > > > > > * Progress Bars/Dialogs > > > > > > > > * Lifecycle Implementation > > > > > > > > * And other Android specific features > > > > > > > > > Accelerometer is the only major feature I am missing. > > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 7:24 pm, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I think my chances are slim, but not because I'm not making > > > > > > > > > effective > > > > > > > > > use of Android. From Judges perspective they will not know the > > > > > > > > > difference. I'm using touch functionality, a lot of the GUI > > > > > > > > > components, pop ups, etc, etc. Based on your logic even > > > > > > > > > tberthel has > > > > > > > > > a worse chance of winning than me. All he is doing is using > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > drawing utilities from what I've seen from his demos. In > > > > > > > > > fact, a lot > > > > > > > > > of the applications I've seen all they do is use the 3d or 2d > > > > > > > > > drawing > > > > > > > > > utilities and that is it. This is true specially for a lot of > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > games. > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 9:11 pm, "Cow Bay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > i feel kinda sorry for your possibility to lose ADC, for it > > > > > > > > > > sounds like you > > > > > > > > > > fail ADC Judging Criteria 2, " Effective Use of the Android > > > > > > > > > > Platform" >:{) > > > > > > > > > > > still wishing you good lucks.... > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > > > > From: "Incognito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > To: "Android Challenge" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 4:05 PM > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [android-challenge] Re: Android/Applets/J2ME > > > > > > > > > > > >sounds like your apps were originally designed and > > > > > > > > > > >implemented > > > > > > > > > > >platform-agnostic. that is, they were not originally for > > > > > > > > > > >android because, > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > >they had been, imho, it would not seem so easy as you > > > > > > > > > > >describe. > > > > > > > > > > > True, that was my goal. I wrote my code so that it would > > > > > > > > > > initially > > > > > > > > > > work on J2SE, J2ME, and Android. This forced me to write > > > > > > > > > > the business > > > > > > > > > > layer platform-agnostic and just write interfaces that were > > > > > > > > > > platform > > > > > > > > > > specific. > > > > > > > > > > > >take for examples Android Intent, LBS, content provider, > > > > > > > > > > >AndroidManifests.xml, Services, and other Android-specific > > > > > > > > > > >components, > > > > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > > > >are seldomly seen in other mobile platforms, not to > > > > > > > > > > >mention those > > > > > > > > > > >android-specific api "constraints". > > > > > > > > > > >>how did you convert those? > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not using LBS so no problem there. However, if I were I > > > > > > > > > > would just > > > > > > > > > > put that behind a generic interface. > > > > > > > > > > Services - My application does not require to be running on > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > background so I didn't need to convert this. > > > > > > > > > > Android Intent, content provider - I didn't have to use > > > > > > > > > > this feature > > > > > > > > > > so I did not have to create an interface for it. IPhone > > > > > > > > > > does has > > > > > > > > > > something very similar to this though. > > > > > > > > > > They pass URL's between applications. > > > > > > > > > > > What I did have to create interfaces for are the drawing > > > > > > > > > > utilities, > > > > > > > > > > Threads, GUI objects, like buttons, text fields, text > > > > > > > > > > buttons, touch > > > > > > > > > > and key event handling, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 28, 8:32 pm, "Cow Bay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > sounds like your apps were originally designed and > > > > > > > > > > > implemented > > > > > > > > > > > platform-agnostic. that is, they were not originally for > > > > > > > > > > > android because, > > > > > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > > they had been, imho, it would not seem so easy as you > > > > > > > > > > > describe. > > > > > > > > > > > > take for examples Android Intent, LBS, content provider, > > > > > > > > > > > AndroidManifests.xml, Services, and other > > > > > > > > > > > Android-specific components, > > > > > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > > > > are seldomly seen in other mobile platforms, not to > > > > > > > > > > > mention those > > > > > > > > > > > android-specific api "constraints". > > > > > > > > > > > > how did you convert those? > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > > > > > From: "Incognito" > > > ... > > > read more ยป --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Challenge" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
