The $1079 question
by Richard Fox · in General Discussion · 07/20/2003 (8:36 am) · 20 replies
What is the difference between the full blown $1079 version of Visiual C++.NET Proffesional Ed. and Standard Ed.? It seems like such a hefty price difference.
Confession: I've been using a burned copy of Visual Studio 6.0 over that last 3 years to learn C++ (better than what I had learned already from BS home courses)That's not BS-Bachelor of Science either.
Problem: I want to make distributable games, but I don't want to spend $1000+ on something that may never pan out.
Will the Standard Ed. have all the code features required to make fully distributable games? What IDE features does it lack that I would either miss or not miss in the process of game dev? (A simple answer to this is "It has all the features you need to make distributable games", unless it doesn't)
Confession: I've been using a burned copy of Visual Studio 6.0 over that last 3 years to learn C++ (better than what I had learned already from BS home courses)That's not BS-Bachelor of Science either.
Problem: I want to make distributable games, but I don't want to spend $1000+ on something that may never pan out.
Will the Standard Ed. have all the code features required to make fully distributable games? What IDE features does it lack that I would either miss or not miss in the process of game dev? (A simple answer to this is "It has all the features you need to make distributable games", unless it doesn't)
About the author
#2
07/20/2003 (9:46 am)
I'm a little confused. You gave me a link to the C#.NET comparison table. Do you suggest C#.NET over C++.NET? I've concentrated my efforts on C++ over the last few years and have never even looked at C# code. Is it much different?
#3
msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/howtobuy/choosing.aspx
The only thing I see that sucks is the optimizer is missing from standard. If you want to do C# or J# or VB.NET you can get a free IDE (it uses the .NET or mono command compilers and sets them up automatically for you) thats very good (but not at 1.0 yet but close) at www.icsharpcode.net/OpenSource/SD/Default.aspx
07/20/2003 (10:56 am)
Just change the vcsharp to visualc.. like this:msdn.microsoft.com/visualc/howtobuy/choosing.aspx
The only thing I see that sucks is the optimizer is missing from standard. If you want to do C# or J# or VB.NET you can get a free IDE (it uses the .NET or mono command compilers and sets them up automatically for you) thats very good (but not at 1.0 yet but close) at www.icsharpcode.net/OpenSource/SD/Default.aspx
#4
07/20/2003 (11:45 am)
Wow, that .NET 1.1 is huge! 7hours to download. But hey it's free. Can I make stuff like map editors with this, or other tools? I've never messed with the .NET stuff, so I'm pretty dumb about it.
#5
07/20/2003 (1:01 pm)
.NET is just a set of libraries and a compiler that compiles to byte code to be interpreted by the virtual machine. So you could write some code in 1 language.. and use it in any of the .NET languages. Thats kinda of a poor explanation.. check microsoft site for a better one. But yes you can create tools or games with .NET. Some people ported Quake 2 to .NET and got a 15% increase in speed over the original.
#6
1) It does not do full optimizations (it is the same compiler in Visual C++ Standard Edition, which also doesn't do full optimizations)
2) The .NET Framework doesn't include all the system headers and related files, but you can also download these for free as part of the Platform SDK download from Microsoft.
So you can actually develop using Microsoft's C++ compiler for free if you download the .NET SDK and the Platform SDK. It is fully legal to do so, you wouldn't be violating any licensing agreements. Of course you don't get the Visual Studio IDE in this case, but it is free.
To answer the original question, yes you can make full games with the standard edition of Visual C++. The only issue is the code isn't optimized, so your games will run slower. A good plan for you might be to get either Visual C++ Standard or get the .NET SDK and Platform SDK and use either one of those for development now, and then buy the full version of Visual Studio later if your game is actually virtually complete. It is generally not worth it to worry about compiler-specific optimizations until that point anyway, and if you never finish the game you aren't out $1000+ for "nothing".
07/20/2003 (2:22 pm)
The .NET Framework SDK actually comes with the Visual Studio C++ compiler built in, and it is available for free download. It can build C++ programs to both native executables or .NET Managed code but:1) It does not do full optimizations (it is the same compiler in Visual C++ Standard Edition, which also doesn't do full optimizations)
2) The .NET Framework doesn't include all the system headers and related files, but you can also download these for free as part of the Platform SDK download from Microsoft.
So you can actually develop using Microsoft's C++ compiler for free if you download the .NET SDK and the Platform SDK. It is fully legal to do so, you wouldn't be violating any licensing agreements. Of course you don't get the Visual Studio IDE in this case, but it is free.
To answer the original question, yes you can make full games with the standard edition of Visual C++. The only issue is the code isn't optimized, so your games will run slower. A good plan for you might be to get either Visual C++ Standard or get the .NET SDK and Platform SDK and use either one of those for development now, and then buy the full version of Visual Studio later if your game is actually virtually complete. It is generally not worth it to worry about compiler-specific optimizations until that point anyway, and if you never finish the game you aren't out $1000+ for "nothing".
#7
Thanks for the links and clarification on .NET etc.
George-
Thanks, that's the insight I need. The cool thing is, I plan to make turn based games anyway, so if my programs run a litle slow, I don't really think it would be all that big of a problem. However, let's pretend I want to include some particle effects in my game. Would the execution speed of the compiled program noticeably affect the animation? Also, since I really only intend to animate one unit at a time with several frames of animation, would idle animation on several units cause a hit for the main animation sequences, ie "ogre scratches his butt while waiting for orders"
Although turn based, the program will run in real time for the animation effects of my 2D sprites and possible particle effects(I may need to go with sprites for this instead, but that would suck)
One last thing, I don't get the Visual Studio IDE with .NET SDK that's fine, but does it come with an IDE at all? Or will I have to edit in some text editor (like EditPlus) and compile at the command line?
Thanks for all the info, it's invaluable. I'll gladly absorb any more advice and insight.
07/20/2003 (5:51 pm)
Tim-Thanks for the links and clarification on .NET etc.
George-
Thanks, that's the insight I need. The cool thing is, I plan to make turn based games anyway, so if my programs run a litle slow, I don't really think it would be all that big of a problem. However, let's pretend I want to include some particle effects in my game. Would the execution speed of the compiled program noticeably affect the animation? Also, since I really only intend to animate one unit at a time with several frames of animation, would idle animation on several units cause a hit for the main animation sequences, ie "ogre scratches his butt while waiting for orders"
Although turn based, the program will run in real time for the animation effects of my 2D sprites and possible particle effects(I may need to go with sprites for this instead, but that would suck)
One last thing, I don't get the Visual Studio IDE with .NET SDK that's fine, but does it come with an IDE at all? Or will I have to edit in some text editor (like EditPlus) and compile at the command line?
Thanks for all the info, it's invaluable. I'll gladly absorb any more advice and insight.
#8
correct.
It would be nice if you could rig up sharpdevelop to work with C++.. but I dont know if you can. I checked on their forums and some people have asked about it. They just said they didn't have time to add the free .NET C++ compiler or to add GCC. But there is syntax highlighting in the editor for C++.
-Tim aka Spock
07/20/2003 (6:06 pm)
Quote:Or will I have to edit in some text editor (like EditPlus) and compile at the command line?
correct.
It would be nice if you could rig up sharpdevelop to work with C++.. but I dont know if you can. I checked on their forums and some people have asked about it. They just said they didn't have time to add the free .NET C++ compiler or to add GCC. But there is syntax highlighting in the editor for C++.
-Tim aka Spock
#9
Also, on your other question.. Many games these days are limited by graphics card fillrate. If this is the case for you, having super optimized code versus non-optimized code might not even make a noticable dent in the overall game speed...And for a LOT of games even the non-optimized code generation of VS .Net's C++ compiler is good enough as long as your code is pretty well thought out at the C++ level.. So you might want to give the free .Net C++ compiler a whirl and see if it fits your needs before buying anything.
07/20/2003 (7:33 pm)
As Tim mentioned, yes you'll need some other text editor or IDE. There are a few free IDEs like SharpDevelop (which Tim mentioned) and Eclipse. I don't think Eclipse has out-of-the-box support for the .NET SDK C++ compiler either, but both Eclipse and SharpDevelop are open source so you could in theory go and add support... (I have no idea how difficult or easy it would be with either, having never worked with the internals of either).Also, on your other question.. Many games these days are limited by graphics card fillrate. If this is the case for you, having super optimized code versus non-optimized code might not even make a noticable dent in the overall game speed...And for a LOT of games even the non-optimized code generation of VS .Net's C++ compiler is good enough as long as your code is pretty well thought out at the C++ level.. So you might want to give the free .Net C++ compiler a whirl and see if it fits your needs before buying anything.
#11
Instead of laying out the cash for Visual C++, you might consider trying out the Free Dev-C++ / Mingw GCC combination. It's free and it's an optimizing compiler.
07/21/2003 (7:23 am)
I suspect a _LOT_ more games would be CPU bound instead of fillrate bound if they weren't running with an optimizer.Instead of laying out the cash for Visual C++, you might consider trying out the Free Dev-C++ / Mingw GCC combination. It's free and it's an optimizing compiler.
#12
What's a good link to that? I found a couple but it seems I've found several different versions. One was in another language. German I think. I found the DevC++ but the Mingw GCC is giving me the problems.
07/21/2003 (7:48 am)
Mark- What's a good link to that? I found a couple but it seems I've found several different versions. One was in another language. German I think. I found the DevC++ but the Mingw GCC is giving me the problems.
#13
There have been a few threads about compiling torque under mingw, and I've seen some claims that it works fine. I don't know though personal knowledge, though - I paid for an optimizing Visual C++ 6.0 some time ago. :)
07/21/2003 (8:15 am)
MingW's site is at www.mingw.org/There have been a few threads about compiling torque under mingw, and I've seen some claims that it works fine. I don't know though personal knowledge, though - I paid for an optimizing Visual C++ 6.0 some time ago. :)
#15
-TIm aka Spock
07/21/2003 (10:49 am)
The problem I have with command line compilers with no IDE is command line debugging sucks. Ive done it quite a bit in GCC on linux.. its no where as simple as graphical debugging.-TIm aka Spock
#16
That's what I figured. It looks like the Dev-C++ 4.0 is a fairly decent compiler, and it's free. But do you know if the .NET SDK is compatible with it? I just spent the last 14 hours downloading it last night, while I slept.
07/21/2003 (10:56 am)
Tim-That's what I figured. It looks like the Dev-C++ 4.0 is a fairly decent compiler, and it's free. But do you know if the .NET SDK is compatible with it? I just spent the last 14 hours downloading it last night, while I slept.
#17
07/21/2003 (7:41 pm)
I don't know anything about Dev-C++, sorry. 
#18
07/21/2003 (7:54 pm)
There are graphical debuggers for Linux. I used one when I was doing Linux dev, I don't remember the name though :(
#20
08/12/2003 (2:53 pm)
Dont use C#......
Torque Owner Bil Simser
msdn.microsoft.com/vcsharp/howtobuy/choosing.aspx
Yes you can build fully distributable products with the standard edition. You just don't get to build things like apps for mobile devices or integrate other .NET languages with it.