As a primarily Python programmer I would have to disagree with this
vehemently.  In my experience, the Python bindings on existing
engines tend to be a second rate affair in terms of what is exposed
and (....)



True, this is what I experienced as well...
With the exception of soya3d, I really like the framework, although the
function/object naming is not very consistent - but it's VERY easy to load a
heightmap and get a charactor blender-model to walk your earth (10-20 lines
including ground-collision)

http://home.gna.org/oomadness/en/soya/index.html



When I last looked for something more than PyOpenGL or a 3D
engine to use, I ended up using Nedu as a base.

http://trac.zeitherrschaft.org/neuro/wiki


I personally would not recommend neuro, since it seems to be tailored for
the "I need the lastest pixel shader magic" - demo-hackers. Doesn't have
very game-specific stuff by itself - but I didnt browse the docu that
extensivly.


> My reasoning is:
> > -That bad 3D is worse than good 2D;


For all my projects, be it for professional or personal use, I start with a
simple (!) 2d engine to test out the basics (gameplay mechanics you would
call it for a game)... keep it simple.

check out this guy, who did prototypes for Spore - he has a blog online
somewhere with a lot of screenshots of Spore prototypes... they are composed
of 2d lines, colors and some numbers. thats it - doesnt even look like a
game. http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=11628

take a look at http://www.kamilche.com for
> some screenshots of a 2D game I'm currently developing.


mh.. couldnt find screenshots, but the NPCs look nice indead :-)


greetings
simon

Reply via email to