Java-Gaming.org Hi !
Featured games (83)
games approved by the League of Dukes
Games in Showcase (538)
Games in Android Showcase (132)
games submitted by our members
Games in WIP (600)
games currently in development
News: Read the Java Gaming Resources, or peek at the official Java tutorials
 
    Home     Help   Search   Login   Register   
Pages: [1] 2
  ignore  |  Print  
  Mobile 3D Graphics API  (Read 5630 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Offline swpalmer

JGO Coder


Exp: 12 years


Where's the Kaboom?


« Posted 2003-06-02 13:28:51 »

JSR-184 is available for public review...
http://jcp.org/aboutJava/communityprocess/review/jsr184/index.html

Review closes June 12...

Offline shawnkendall

Senior Devvie





« Reply #1 - Posted 2003-06-02 16:31:48 »

Reviewing...
Looks pretty "full-featured" so far.

Shawn Kendall
Cosmic Interactive, LLC
http://www.facebook.com/BermudaDash
Offline shawnkendall

Senior Devvie





« Reply #2 - Posted 2003-06-02 16:36:03 »

Anyone know who the Sun reps were on the Expert Group?
There is allot of J3D in there....

Shawn Kendall
Cosmic Interactive, LLC
http://www.facebook.com/BermudaDash
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline dtwilleager

Senior Newbie




Java games rock!


« Reply #3 - Posted 2003-06-03 18:38:08 »

Me.   Smiley

How are you doing Shawn, see you next week.

Doug.
Offline swpalmer

JGO Coder


Exp: 12 years


Where's the Kaboom?


« Reply #4 - Posted 2003-06-04 01:58:59 »

Hey Doug.. just read your bio at java.sun.com

"Doug Twilleager is the Chief Architect of Java Gaming Technologies being developed in the software technology office at Sun Microsystems. Previously, he was one of the architects of Java 3D.  Twilleager also has worked on graphics technologies such as OpenGL and worked in the graphics hardware architecture group at Sun. "

So you aren't working on Java 3D anymore?

I hope Java 3D will continue to evolve, or is it expected that Java 3D will not be used for desktop games in favour of the new Mobile API?  Is Java 3D 1.4 still happening?

Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 429
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #5 - Posted 2003-06-04 11:27:17 »

We'll be putting OpenGL ES in LWJGL as well Smiley Just to keep competition sweet.

Cas Smiley

Offline dtwilleager

Senior Newbie




Java games rock!


« Reply #6 - Posted 2003-06-04 17:01:50 »

I'm not directly involved in Java 3D development anymore, but I am involved in its evolution.  Java 3D 1.4 is in a holding pattern right now.  We are working on different possibilities.

We will be announcing alternatives next week.  Wink
Offline Herkules

Senior Devvie




Friendly fire isn't friendly!


« Reply #7 - Posted 2003-06-04 17:23:22 »

Alternatives to Java3D? Means no Java3D any more?

Dare to break my code....

HARDCODE    --     DRTS/FlyingGuns/JPilot/JXInput  --    skype me: joerg.plewe
Offline dtwilleager

Senior Newbie




Java games rock!


« Reply #8 - Posted 2003-06-04 21:24:39 »

I said alternative - not replacement.  Java 3D is not going away.

Doug.
Offline pepe

Junior Devvie




Nothing unreal exists


« Reply #9 - Posted 2003-06-05 05:27:57 »

Quote
I'm not directly involved in Java 3D development anymore, but I am involved in its evolution.  Java 3D 1.4 is in a holding pattern right now.  We are working on different possibilities.

We will be announcing alternatives next week.  Wink

Hi, Doug.
Please pardon my low english skills, but what does 'in a holding pattern' means precisely ? What dev state does it relate to? Is it stalled? Close to release?
Thanks a lot.

Home page: http://frederic.barachant.com
------------------------------------------------------
GoSub: java2D gamechmark http://frederic.barachant.com/GoSub/GoSub.jnlp
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline Herkules

Senior Devvie




Friendly fire isn't friendly!


« Reply #10 - Posted 2003-06-05 06:10:52 »

juliet-three-delta, HARDCODE tower......

juliet-three-delta,  are you ready to copy?......

juliet-three-delta, leave holding pattern, descent to 1000feet, enter traffic circuit downwind, report base one-four.....

juliet-three-delta, cleared to land one-four!!

HARDCODE    --     DRTS/FlyingGuns/JPilot/JXInput  --    skype me: joerg.plewe
Offline dtwilleager

Senior Newbie




Java games rock!


« Reply #11 - Posted 2003-06-05 15:17:24 »

It is stalled.  We are looking at ways to get it going again.

Doug.
Offline Zane

Senior Newbie




Java games rock!


« Reply #12 - Posted 2003-06-06 01:10:12 »

Hey Doug,
Great to hear about the Gaming initiative. Anything you can share about what you will be working on?
-Z
Offline Mithrandir

Senior Devvie




Cut from being on the bleeding edge too long


« Reply #13 - Posted 2003-06-06 03:11:36 »

Unfortunately, when something becomes stalled at Sun, it dies.  The same thing happened with a number of other APIs, such as JSDT.  It's been 3 years now and they're still saying "We're trying to work out a way to keep it going". People are interested in maintaining the code. However, if JSDT is any guide, don't expect people or companies to become really interested in helping out unless it becomes completely open-sourced.  Right now, I hold exceedingly little hope for Java3D's future in terms of expansion and feature addition.  I've yet to work out what I'm going to do with j3d.org.

The site for 3D Graphics information http://www.j3d.org/
Aviatrix3D JOGL Scenegraph http://aviatrix3d.j3d.org/
Programming is essentially a markup language surrounding mathematical formulae and thus, should not be patentable.
Offline abies

Senior Devvie





« Reply #14 - Posted 2003-06-06 06:56:29 »

Just an idea - would it be possible to reimplement most important parts of java3d in opensource project ?

There are part of java3d which could be ignored - GeometryCompression for example (I don't think anybody is using it anyway), possibly some other classes. Utility classes and javax.vecmath could be just taken from existing java3d (and I think that it is possible to ask Sun to 'free' these both packages, contrary to core java3d).

I know it is a lot of work - but hopefully, it could be made in incremental manner, by getting more and more complicated programs to work.

I'm just not sure if it is worth it - maybe everybody just will do better by implementing their minimal, just-what-is-needed scenegraphs on top of opengl, instead of putting time into reimplemeting specific java3d quirks.

Artur Biesiadowski
Offline kevglass

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 211
Projects: 24
Exp: 18 years


Coder, Trainee Pixel Artist, Game Reviewer


« Reply #15 - Posted 2003-06-06 07:21:24 »

This is all a little glib, just because its happened before doesn't mean it has to happen again. Java3D brings alot to the party, maybe not as much to the gaming arena, but there are plenty of other uses for 3d visualisation.

I imagine its Java 3D 1.4 that is "stalled" right now (most of the new stuff is only really important to the gaming community). We have a perfectly good reason for this to be stalled, e.g. Sun going through a bit spate of reorg with respect to gaming.

I'm not trying to say its all rosey, just that second guessing these things tends to be pretty futile and could possibly drive new comers to java3d away (with potentionally no good reason).

Kev

Offline pepe

Junior Devvie




Nothing unreal exists


« Reply #16 - Posted 2003-06-07 08:32:26 »

Quote
It is stalled.  We are looking at ways to get it going again.

Doug.

I'm somewhat disapointed, but i gues i'll have to wait what is said at javaone to react if things don't go the right way.

Then, j3d.org might be a good place to start a lobby or something more appropriate, if necessary.

Home page: http://frederic.barachant.com
------------------------------------------------------
GoSub: java2D gamechmark http://frederic.barachant.com/GoSub/GoSub.jnlp
Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 429
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #17 - Posted 2003-06-07 08:54:46 »

Java3D has received a lot of slatings from game programming types , and rightly so, as it doesn't quite cut it in a very competitive industry. There's a gulf between a generic scenegraph and a game "engine".

What a lot of people seem to think though is that Java3D isn't any good for games development. I'm very interested in using the J3D model loaders to load data out of Max and save them in my own ready-to-render format. Very much like Quake has separate tools to do its editing which don't use the quake runtime engine to draw. You see the difference here?

So while those of us who are concentrating on rendering in the best possible way get on with it, Java3D could be deliberately emphasised as what it's best at which is a scenegraph manipulator, and the realtim rendering capabilities could be removed. Of course that would break everyone's code Wink Never mind.

Just a thought, anyway.

Cas Smiley

Offline kevglass

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 211
Projects: 24
Exp: 18 years


Coder, Trainee Pixel Artist, Game Reviewer


« Reply #18 - Posted 2003-06-07 09:09:52 »

(Isn't this becoming a bit of duplication of another post, probably more applicable here to be honest.)

Saying "java3d isn't good for gaming" is just close minded speak. It completely depends on the type of game. If you're talking slow paced game, you reduce complexity of the realtime rendering by using Java3D. If you _need_ super fast rendering, I agree, something like GL4Java is more applicable, although, if this is your real requirement you might consider using good OO practice in C++.

Don't get me wrong, you see people using Java3D, attempting to write games that compete visually with direct GL bindings, as its just not possible (atm). Apart from anything else you can't get to half the extensions.

As to removing the realtime parts of Java 3D? Java 3D is perfectly capable of doing realtime rendering, just not to the performance on direct GL bindings... so, why would anyone want to do that?

Kev

Offline William

Junior Devvie




No Exit


« Reply #19 - Posted 2003-06-07 11:46:03 »

The rendering capabilities should not be removed from Java3D, just separated from the scenegraph and made accessable to programmers. I think having a well-designed rendering API that can be implemented using either DirectX, OpenGL, various console APIs or any other underlying graphics solution out there would be good. I think this refactoring was on the plan list for J3D 1.4 though.
Offline Mithrandir

Senior Devvie




Cut from being on the bleeding edge too long


« Reply #20 - Posted 2003-06-07 15:46:16 »

Then, j3d.org might be a good place to start a lobby or something more appropriate, if necessary.

I'd be willing to do that. Recently I haven't been paying as much attention to the site as I should be.  One of the thoughts I've been musing over is turning j3d.org into an Anything Relating to Java and 3D Graphics site.  That would require a considerable amount of effort, so having some more volunteers to help would be really useful. I also have some qualms in doing so because the site is hosted on my personal machine, which happens to also host vlc.com.au, xj3d.org and the company website yumetech.com. Maybe CVS commit priveleges just to update the site and that's it....

Other things to consider about the process - Java3D is a "formal" Java extension API.  It uses the javax. package name space.  Just turning it into an arbitrary open source package would be extremely difficult from a process perspective. Sure we could take the 1.3 code and do bug fixes, but extending it with new capabilities and keeping it labelled "Java3D" would be difficult to say the least. Sun's lawyers aren't known for being friendly in this regard.

My company (Yumetech) has had some initial discussions with Michael Schulmann, the manager in charge of the J3D and other Java media stuff about where to go from here. They are open to the possibility of someone purchasing the code from them to then make further improvements, and specifically with the ability to do a proper OSS license (ie not the bastardised SCSL-style license).  Nothing concrete yet, but keep in mind it may be possible to do something like a Blender project, where a large number of people get together to contribute funds to purchase the codebase from Sun and then turn it into a OSS project.  

Obviously there are some licensing issues to deal with as Sun has licensed some parts of the codebase from third-parties, which would make it hard or impossible for them to release those bits (and therefore we'd need to replace them to get a functional codebase).  However, Sun at least seem to be willing to part with some of their IP too. We've had separate discussions as part of the Web3D Consortium process about RF licensing some of their patents with geometry compression and they seem to be quite willing to discuss it.  

So in general, it looks like a mixed bag of prospects for the future. I hold close to zero hope that any further development will happen with Java3D beyond occasional bug fix releases of the 1.3.x line. Kelvin and Mark Hood are still floating around the list and registering bug IDs, which is a marginally positive sign.

The site for 3D Graphics information http://www.j3d.org/
Aviatrix3D JOGL Scenegraph http://aviatrix3d.j3d.org/
Programming is essentially a markup language surrounding mathematical formulae and thus, should not be patentable.
Offline abies

Senior Devvie





« Reply #21 - Posted 2003-06-07 16:15:49 »

Quote

Other things to consider about the process - Java3D is a "formal" Java extension API.  It uses the javax. package name space.  Just turning it into an arbitrary open source package would be extremely difficult from a process perspective. Sure we could take the 1.3 code and do bug fixes, but extending it with new capabilities and keeping it labelled "Java3D" would be difficult to say the least. Sun's lawyers aren't known for being friendly in this regard.


I'm thinking about something more in line of lesstif and MesaGl. Everybody knows what they are for, they work even better than originals, but do not use the 'real' name.

Quote
We've had separate discussions as part of the Web3D Consortium process about RF licensing some of their patents with geometry compression and they seem to be quite willing to discuss it.  

Has ANYBODY used java3d compressed geometry for anything in real application ? AFAIK, it is a failed experiment, dead end which is not maintained since a long time, just nobody was brave enough to deprecate it in java3d. Great idea, which has not ignited hardware support and thus became not-really-useful.
I would suggest to not worry about graphic compression.

Real question is if Sun wants java3d to continue. I don't know how big money is involved in this mobile 3d API - is it only a non-profit effort to get more java exposure, of Sun is actually thinking about licensing mobile api to various vendors for big bucks. In latter case, it is highly unlikely they will want to give java3d code away.

As for the Blender option - I doubt if there is enough java3d developers out there wanting to spare enough money, given the fact that cost will be probably quite high (if Apple has not managed to license it so far).

In ideal world, Sun could just pick some company, which would pick up java3d codebase, open it up and earn money from support, while managing 'official' releases - and in case of trouble, anybody could just fix their favorite bug.  In fact, anybody could do their own forks, they just could not name it java3d. But we do not live in ideal world...

I think we should wait till the end of JavaOne, see what Sun holds inside a sleeve and later start to lobby them to do one thing or another. Anything is better than situation throughout last year, when everybody was thinking 1.4 is in the making, counted stages of JSR and it turned out that it will not be there after all...

Artur Biesiadowski
Offline Mithrandir

Senior Devvie




Cut from being on the bleeding edge too long


« Reply #22 - Posted 2003-06-07 20:22:29 »

Quote
Has ANYBODY used java3d compressed geometry for anything in real application ?


I know of a few.  The  Web3d Consortium is more interested in the patents aspects for the work done by Deering - in particular normal compression and a couple of others.  These are generally useful in any compressed geometry format, particularly for streaming geometry, such as what X3D or MPEG-4 would use.

Quote
Sun is actually thinking about licensing mobile api to various vendors for big bucks. In latter case, it is highly unlikely they will want to give java3d code away.[/quote[

My understanding is that they are not even related. The Mobile API does something quite different. At its most simple difference - geometry is represented by a scene tree, not a scene graph.  There are other major architectural differences, meaning that the mobile API couldn't be based on the J3D codebase.

Quote
As for the Blender option - I doubt if there is enough java3d developers out there wanting to spare enough money, given the fact that cost will be probably quite high (if Apple has not managed to license it so far).  


The Apple issue is political, not financial.  Right now, we have no way of knowing exactly how much Sun would be interested in selling their code for. We've proposed a number of different options to them. This was late Friday so they haven't had a chance to give us a considered response. But, the one thing I would say, is that we wouldn't be looking at overly large sums of money.  That is, Java3D is not worth anything like the 100K that was paid for Blender.  I doubt we'd be able to pick it up for $5K either,  so pick a number in between.

Quote
In ideal world, Sun could just pick some company, which would pick up java3d codebase, open it up and earn money from support


That is one model that we suggested to them. The reply was "how much would you be willing to pay for the codebase".  ie They won't be giving it away.

Quote
I'm thinking about something more in line of lesstif and MesaGl. Everybody knows what they are for, they work even better than originals, but do not use the 'real' name.


The problem that you have there is the package naming. Where Mesa could get away with using the same API calls, a Java3D project could not.  Remember that the java.* and javax.* package names are exceedingly jealously guarded by Sun.  Mind you, the JBoss project so far has managed to get away with this, so it could be interesting project to try and see what happens. If people are interested in giving it a shot, j3d.org is the place to make it happen. All the facilities, except for a set of message boards, are there.  

Also, have a dig around for the old jFree-D project. That was an OSS clone of J3D 1.1 a while ago. It hasn't done much for a very long time though. IIRC it was based on GL4Java. With the forthcoming formal APIs for OpenGL then we have some standardised work to go with (or do a lot of native code wrapping using some of the ideas from LWJGL  (but couldn't base it on it because of the need for DX support)

The site for 3D Graphics information http://www.j3d.org/
Aviatrix3D JOGL Scenegraph http://aviatrix3d.j3d.org/
Programming is essentially a markup language surrounding mathematical formulae and thus, should not be patentable.
Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 429
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #23 - Posted 2003-06-07 21:48:36 »

Quote
(but couldn't base it on it because of the need for DX support)
There is no dependency on DirectX in LWJGL. It is totally platform agnostic.

The J3D code is basically worthless. Anyone could write J3D. It doesn't even need to exist.

Cas Smiley

Offline Mithrandir

Senior Devvie




Cut from being on the bleeding edge too long


« Reply #24 - Posted 2003-06-08 02:20:37 »

You've got it the wrong way around. People want the DX support of Java3D, that LWJGL doesn't have (for obvious reasons).  For example, the GL drivers on my Radeon 9700 are really bad. Lots of nasty bugs in them, so I run the DX version of J3D.

Sure J3D needs to exist. It exists for the same reason Performer or OpenSG exist. People like either to get stuff done quickly with minimal effort or having their hand held. It does many things simply for those that want to do things quickly and easily.  Some of it you can replicate fast, but the high-performance tweaks it includes are hard to replicate in a short amount of time.

If you want to turn this into a "anything highlevel sux and the only Good Programmers code in OpenGL" thread go for it. I'll happily rip you apart. The fact is not everybody wants to spend their time pushing polygons, nor are they interested in getting to know the vagaries of a couple of dozen different driver implementations and their bugs. That's why JSR-184 was put together and why J3D is popular.

The site for 3D Graphics information http://www.j3d.org/
Aviatrix3D JOGL Scenegraph http://aviatrix3d.j3d.org/
Programming is essentially a markup language surrounding mathematical formulae and thus, should not be patentable.
Offline kevglass

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 211
Projects: 24
Exp: 18 years


Coder, Trainee Pixel Artist, Game Reviewer


« Reply #25 - Posted 2003-06-08 05:43:17 »

Is this a "Cas Troll" I see before me? Tut tut.

Offline abies

Senior Devvie





« Reply #26 - Posted 2003-06-08 08:54:37 »

Quote

The J3D code is basically worthless. Anyone could write J3D. It doesn't even need to exist.


With all due respect, I do NOT think that everyone could write J3D. Look at openscenegraph - it is more or less similar to java3d, is developed for quite a long time now, but I doubt if they have out-of-the-box support for head tracking or CAVE.

I agree, that for the games alone, probably any sane programmer could came up with acceptable scenegraph implementation. I doubt if many people could create efficient state sorting, but maybe for specific application it can be a bit easier then in generic case.

For me, openscenegraph is very good example. It is developed as open source for 4 years now and it started from already working version back then, a lot of people work on it AND it still lacks some functionality compared to java3d (while java3d lack another functionality from OSG of course). So yes, everybody can write their own scenegraph, as long as they have umpteen opengl developers working for 4 years on it...

One year ago when I was developing java3d application (NWN Model Viewer), other people were doing the same in opengl (in C++ and in Delphi, but it is not important here). I have looked at their code when our functionality was similar, and complexity was similar. They had to implement some things I had in java3d from start, I had to workaround java3d quirks while in opengl it was not a problem. Looking from this point, java3d might be useless - if you can do the same, with same effort in opengl, then why care. But there is ONE big difference. Anybody using java3d can take my loader, and with 2 lines of code, load fully animated model in their application. One person actually replaced md2 loader with my loader - no problems at all. Imagine how much work it would require to fit somebody's load/render code inside your opengl application, when all the logic, rendering etc are mixed in same functions ? What with precious state sorting you have developed trying to create MyOwnScenegraph and now it is not working with other guy code, because he just throws all opengl statements directly at GPU ? Certainly, amount of work needed to integrate it will be greater than in java3d, possibly requiring quite heavy refactoring of loader/renderer code. And now, the other guy releases new version of loader and you go through all this route again....

Yes, java3d sometimes suck. I was shocked when I have seen nvidia shadows demo source - in few pages of code, they have done fully animated, realtime shadow volume, which could work with almost any models. Doing the same is not possible in java3d because lack of access to stencil buffer/etc and even if it is not a case, it would take considerably more code. But for me, benefits of having common scenegraph are very big - it really allows to reuse components, instead of 'not-invented-here' syndrome.

I think this goes exactly back to software reusability. For example C++ - they lack the standard library, some people use STL, some don't, every library define their own 'Object' superclass - and thus, most reuse I have seen is at level of C (not C++) libraries - simple calls to specific functionality. Look at java on other side - by having common library, I'm able to take any code out there and it will integrate well with my own. I can just take any Swing component or layour manager and use it - not need to recode entire event handling manager to accomodate somebody's else point of view.

Why people license Unreal engine ? They still end up with a lot of coding for their games. Going with your way of thinking, anybody could write their own engine. Think about java3d as Unreal for scientific community - for people, how want to get things done, plug in ready components (for example loaders in case of java3d, Karma engine in case of Unreal) and focus on part of application which is really their job.

Said that, java3d in current form has a lot of deficiencies - especially if you want to use it for gaming. But for me, correct sentence is 'java3d is doing this and this wrong', not 'nobody needs java3d, everybody can write their own, better scenegraph'.

Oops, a bit too long and probably redundant... sorry for that.

Artur Biesiadowski
Offline princec

« JGO Spiffy Duke »


Medals: 429
Projects: 3
Exp: 16 years


Eh? Who? What? ... Me?


« Reply #27 - Posted 2003-06-08 10:39:26 »

Whoops, sorry, troll slipped out again. It's back in its box now.

What I meant to say was, there is nothing in Java3D that a normal team of programmers couldn't come up with within reasonable time. It's not like the genius that's behind JPEG compression, OGG, or the current design of 3D rendering APIs - it's just a bunch of code to make life a bit easier doing certain tasks. So I stand by the adjusted statement that anyone could write the features they need from J3D within a short enough timeframe, and that this makes its intrinisic value relatively low. Useful it may be, but valuable, it is not.

Not so trolly but a bit impish maybe Wink

Like I said, I want to pick at the model loaders for my own ends.

Cas Smiley

Offline William

Junior Devvie




No Exit


« Reply #28 - Posted 2003-06-08 11:28:42 »

I have been involved in two projects where the timeframe has not allowed me to use OpenGL, but where Java3D has saved the day. The presentations of one of those projects and another project that I wrote in both GL4Java and Java3D (a terrain rendering engine that I quickly ported from GL4Java to Java3D's immediate mode) were also saved by the DirectX support in Java3D when the platform's OpenGL support did not work.

I agree that it is probably worth writing everything in OpenGL if you are working on a really tech-intensive title with a two-year timeline, but for most other games there are quicker solutions, such as Director and its Shockwave3D.

During the last year I have been in contact with a lot of people who develop and produce children's games and games based on TV shows (such as the Swedish version of the American Gladiator show) and all of them work in Director. This leads me to think that there's a big game market for Java3D out there, but it really requires that Java3D gets its sound and media integration worked out as well as better integration with popular 3D-modeling tools (which it would have through the Xj3D-loader if apps like Maya started to support X3D more completely).

Edit: Btw, some producers of such games talked about wanting to build and sell their games for consoles, but right now they would have to go with C++ to do that. It will be very interesting to see if JavaOne brings any news in that area for Java.
Offline Breakfast

Senior Devvie




for great justice!


« Reply #29 - Posted 2003-06-08 14:09:43 »

Typical, I'm just starting to get the hang of something and it goes into a holding pattern. Fantastic. Sad

Verily am I the master of picking losers to back...
Pages: [1] 2
  ignore  |  Print  
 
 
You cannot reply to this message, because it is very, very old.

 

Add your game by posting it in the WIP section,
or publish it in Showcase.

The first screenshot will be displayed as a thumbnail.

rwatson462 (28 views)
2014-12-15 09:26:44

Mr.CodeIt (19 views)
2014-12-14 19:50:38

BurntPizza (37 views)
2014-12-09 22:41:13

BurntPizza (72 views)
2014-12-08 04:46:31

JscottyBieshaar (34 views)
2014-12-05 12:39:02

SHC (46 views)
2014-12-03 16:27:13

CopyableCougar4 (42 views)
2014-11-29 21:32:03

toopeicgaming1999 (110 views)
2014-11-26 15:22:04

toopeicgaming1999 (96 views)
2014-11-26 15:20:36

toopeicgaming1999 (29 views)
2014-11-26 15:20:08
Understanding relations between setOrigin, setScale and setPosition in libGdx
by mbabuskov
2014-10-09 22:35:00

Definite guide to supporting multiple device resolutions on Android (2014)
by mbabuskov
2014-10-02 22:36:02

List of Learning Resources
by Longor1996
2014-08-16 10:40:00

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-08-05 19:33:27

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:20:17

Resources for WIP games
by CogWheelz
2014-08-01 16:19:50

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 16:29:50

List of Learning Resources
by SilverTiger
2014-07-31 16:26:06
java-gaming.org is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites, and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily gaming and game production oriented community. inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the company managing the website of java‑gaming.org
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Managed by Enhanced Four Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!