Engine misconceptions

Maybe I’m a bit overwhelmed with what happened this last week, but the topic that doesn’t seem to leave my head is our engine. While I was discussing the topic in FGL chat I noted again two distinct definitions of engine. What I’m aiming for with this post is to address the common misconceptions that, in my humble opinion, exist to many flash developers.

Each game is an engine

This is the start of the difference of opinions. For many developers reusing a game engine equals to creating a sequel to a game with small tweaks and new graphics. To me, reusing a game engine is reusing multiple classes across games, but not game logic.

Coding your engine is nothing more than to write separate classes for the code you often use. Great simple examples are keyboard input, sound and music handling. On the more complex side we have collisions, AI and bliting. All of these can be coded separately to create a library of code that we can reuse with ease across games. That is the game engine.

It’s impossible to code a cross-genre game engine

Again, this misconception comes from not separating engine from logic. If we detect keyboard input the same way across games, if we preload the same way across games, if we blit the same way across games, regardless of genre, why can’t we write code that fits all genres? It is better to manage some exceptions to your code than to rewrite it over and over again.

If you think about it, that’s how cost is cut in other game development markets, like consoles and PC development. The use of engines is more than common. Huge corporations like EA have their own technology to serve their cross-platform needs, others use commercial engines, like Cry Engine for their target specific development.

So, if a high-end, complex environment like console development can pick up a game engine and write different genres, where lies the difference for a much low-end environment like Actionscript based development?

Extending the core classes of Actionscript is enough for me

This is not a misconception, it is more of a easy way out kind of thing. When I started coding in AS3 I had this exact opinion. To be honest, extending MovieClips was pretty much all I was doing. I can assure you that it is easier but it made my life harder in the long run, as soon as we needed to move forward it became obvious that this presented some performance issues, not to mention that extending classes is probably the least reusable way of coding in AS3.

Final thoughts…

I believe that this generic opinion towards flash game development and engine technology happens because many developers don’t separate engine from logic, for example, a game that needs collision detection has the collision detection code written within the class that controls the level, assuming there is a class in the first place.

Yet, and with our own engine slowly but steadily maturing, I feel that it makes all sense to take the first step which is to create our own reusable classes and then take the second step and code an engine that makes our life as easy as it can possibly be in the long run. We wrote the first class because it would save work, considered a “full” engine because extending MovieClips was clearly damaging our work and right now, I can’t imagine the amount of code I would need to write to sort some design issues that appear almost weekly.

Vlad out!