Yes my game has sound. I added music also, but the submission did not have it.
I'm not sure what you mean by emulating the sound chip since the API already provides the MediaPlayer and other sound APIs. I used the MediaPlayer and a special mechanism to get around the 6-10 sound limit of the emulator. On Apr 29, 4:26 pm, Izard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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. > > ... > > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
