2D Games: C++ or Flash MX ?

I don't know if you've heard of the Arcade classic (now available on the
XBOX) Marvel vs Capcom,
but it used 2D graphics really impressively (much like its predecessor
"Street Fighter")
Originally this game may have been done on C/C++ , but
don't you think this type of game could be made using JAVA or Flash MX ? I'm
considering learning
programming to create a similar game with 2D Graphics, and I can't help
wondering whether I'd be
better off doing it in Flash MX (or using JavaScript )

"abc" <eli22@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
>
> I'm considering learning programming to create a similar game with 2D
> Graphics
>
It is quite impossible to create something like a commercial quality game as
your first program.
It doesn't really matter which language you choose to learn to program in,
though Java or C are good choices. Try something like "hangman" as a first
game.

> C++ is more of a mish-mash of languages, but it has OO features and is
> the language of choice these days for game programming. It's not as
> fast as assembly, but it provides the best in terms of trade-offs of
> power and ease of use.

I bet you learned Java first! Actually, C++ has more OO features than Java.
It's biggest failing is that it has too many fancy features that make it a
lot easier to shoot yourself in the foot... Take this short little block for
example:

template<class T>
class foo : public T
{
};

What does this class do? Well, it depends!

Tony
>
> Reiterating what Malcom said, try something simple first. Here's a
> suggestion of a route to take:
> 1. Tic-Tac-Toe (no AI)
> 2. Tic-Tac-Toe with simple AI
> 3. Hangman
> 4. Tetris
> 5. Pac-Man
>
> If art isn't your bag, any of these can be implemented with simple
> blocky sprites.
>
> Good luck!

Thanks for the advice guys, I realize I won't produce anything commercial
quality after, at least a few dozen
smaller projects, but I thought I'd quote the Marvel vs Capcom game, because
of the style of gaming it
has, and the 2D graphics. Ultimately, I'd like to ATTEMPT making something
along those lines, with
a simplified AI and only a few characters. My Background is actually
Drawing, Computer Graphics &
Multimedia, so I know you can make some pretty amazing things with Flash MX
( I have done a few
simple games myself in it), just look at what Stan Lee is doing with it. As
long as the games don't get too
elaborate, and it's all in 2D, I think Flash can do a lot. I've checked out
some of the books on Game Programming
out there, and those who use primarily C or C++ seem very complex....some of
them seem to require a
knowledge or advanced mathematics as well as physics, so I don't know.

Flash can also make some hardcore 3D stuff, check out
http://www.havok.com/xtra/demos/demo-ragdoll2.html
from havok.
personally Id recommend starting with simple C and building up from there.
If your looking for a nice starting place, with the quake1 and 2 sources
going GPL youve got some good backbone to build up.
"Frecklefoot" <chris@bucketobits.com> wrote in message
news:dfd57bb5.0307100542.256e403f@posting.google.c om...
> "Tony Di Croce" <iaretony@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<b17353ea8f5c61056f492fef06f9b4d9@TeraNews>.. .
> > What do you mean by object oriented? C++ has templates, multiple
> > inheritance, operator overloading... None of which are included in
Java...
> > How can you say that Java is more object oriented?
>
> I was thinking of how _everything_ in Java is derived from the base
> Object class. Even your own classes, even if you don't declare them
> so, are derived from Object. That's pretty darn OO. But you're
> right--C++ has many more OO features than Java. But Java pretty much
> forces you to do things the OO way. In C++ you do OO or not--it's
> totally up to you.
>
> > Sure Java has interfaces, but C++ has that functionality with abstract
base
> > classes (pure virtual members)...
>
> Yes, and I've used abstract base classes. But I prefer interfaces.
> You can use as many interfaces as you like in Java without having to
> worry about multiple inheritance and other things that are potential
> headaches. It just isn't possible in C++ without doing inheritance,
> which has potential conflicts. But C++'s power and other features
> make up for this (IMHO) flaw...
>
> > I can't remember that exact qoute, but if Bjarne said that C++ makes it
> > harder to shoot yourself in the foot, he must have been smoking crack at
the
> > time...
>
> I don't think C++ makes it easier to avoid stupid mistakes either,
> come to think of it. I think it's two main advantages are (1) speed
> (i.e. compared to things like BASIC and Java or even C#) and (2)
> managing complexity (which is true for most OO languages).

Frecklefoot <chris@bucketobits.com> wrote in message
news:dfd57bb5.0307100542.256e403f@posting.google.c om...
> "Tony Di Croce" <iaretony@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<b17353ea8f5c61056f492fef06f9b4d9@TeraNews>.. .

>It just isn't possible in C++ without doing inheritance,
> which has potential conflicts. But C++'s power and other features
> make up for this (IMHO) flaw...

Inheritance only has conflicts if you aren't organized with your code, I
don't mean to say that you aren't, but I do mean to say that C++ doesn't
really have a "flaw" in this area.