User forums > General (but related to Code::Blocks)

Games! WTF - Stay Focused

<< < (2/3) > >>

sethjackson:
Well I agree I don't think games belong in an IDE. You have got to admit it is original though. A free cross-platform tetris clone. w00t.  :lol:

BTW I don't mean to offend you byo. ;) Just my personal opinion. :)

Ceniza:
C'mon, even Excel 95 had a little hidden game :P

The inclusion of that game was already discussed here and it's true many people didn't like that, but some others did. I'm aware it has nothing to do with Code::Blocks itself but it also shows the flexibility the IDE can achieve thru plugins.

It's distributed in the Nightly builds 'cause it's part of the contrib plugins. Due to all the controversy it has generated it could be unchecked by default in the installer of the next release of Code::Blocks (RC3 or whatever its name happen to be), but right now it'll be always there (of course, except if you remove it or disable it).

"A non-serious study has revealed people who uses the Code::Blocks IDE and plays every now and then one of the included Byogames becomes more productive and has a more healthy living thanks to stress alleviation." :D

orefa:

--- Quote from: Ceniza on July 22, 2006, 11:19:02 pm ---"A non-serious study has revealed people who uses the Code::Blocks IDE and plays every now and then one of the included Byogames becomes more productive and has a more healthy living thanks to stress alleviation."
--- End quote ---

Ahhh, but the better-informed among us are also aware of the following study:


--- Quote ---Most Studies Find Nothing, Study Finds (http://www.avantnews.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=253)

The most comprehensive study of studies ever attempted has conclusively determined that few, if any, studies ever actually determine anything. At least not conclusively. The study, commissioned by the International Association of Disillusioned Researchers, examined over 52,000 studies conducted in a wide range of disciplines over the past 50 years. The study's conclusion, that virtually all studies are meaningless, would threaten to threaten the study industry itself were it not for the fact that the study, according to its own conclusions, is itself meaningless.

“We’re both stunned and relieved by the results,” said Dr. Winthrop Pigbladder, D.D.S., who participated in the interdisciplinary study study. “On the one hand, our data proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that nothing whatsoever of substance is ever proved by studies of this kind. On the other hand, our study itself is a study of this kind. So where the hell does that leave us?”

Dr. Pigbladder, a philosopher-statistician-dentist who also dabbles in neo-classical picnicware and is, in the opinion of several colleagues who asked to remain anonymous, “complete shit at banjo”, led the groundbreaking study study together with a respected interdisciplinary team of researchers from several of the top institutes for studies in the United States. Over the course of nearly a decade, the team examined the data, methodologies and conclusions of a vast range of studiers across virtually the entire range of modern study-performing.

“Statistically, the chances of any particular study conclusively proving anything at all are no greater than the chance of a monkey hitting a particular conclusion scribbled on a whiteboard with a magnetic dart,” Dr. Pigbladder said. “And in the rare cases where a study actually does prove something, the chances of a new study disproving the same conclusion within one to two years are a good deal greater than, for example, the chance that the monkey will fondle itself in a manner deemed inappropriate in polite society, usually within three to five minutes. It doesn’t bother us, of course, but we’re pretty open-minded. You have to be, in the study industry.”

While the study industry is currently reeling from the shock of the dramatic findings, a counter-study seeking to conclusively prove the effectiveness of studies of this kind and commissioned by the Interdisciplinary Study Commissioning Institute is expected to render the International Association of Disillusioned Researchers study meaningless, probably within one to two years.

--- End quote ---

BigAngryDog:
Why not include the game(s) as an example C::B projects and/or as an examples of how to produce a pluggin? But not part of the default set of C::B pluggins.

> And the dev who wrote it ought be be docked a weeks pay.

I think that would be a bit harsh. Don't you?  :lol: :lol: :lol:


>C'mon, even Excel 95 had a little hidden game

A "little" flight simulator as I recall.

killerbot:
I would suggest we end the discussion about the CB/BYO games.
They are part of the contribs, which will probably be a separate download next to the official CB.

As said : some like it , some don't.
Is it less professional if such a toy is included ? Some will say yes, some will say no. But on the other hand, maybe a lot of us programmers might learn something from game coders (eg John Carmack) so who are we to judge. IDE's are also used to create games, so to the game developers this might be their hello world program ;-)
The game plug-in is fun, show technology concepts of the CB plug-in architecture and certainly has a good educational value.

BYO has done a wonderfull job on several levels (wxSmith, byo games). As a special gift he gave us the games, they are there to enjoy. if you don't like games well then don't play it.
And as far as the "extra byte load" goes, as said contrib plug-ins will be a distinct download.

Did you ever wonder how much stuff you have installed you don't need when you installed your OS .... ???


Oh yeah : why are they in the nighlies : so we can provide it to everyone without answering 100*100*100*100 times where that cool plug-in can be found people are talking about, and to find bugs in it ;-)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page