Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Indie Game Jam 2 Physics-Based Games Released

Posted by simoniker on from the mmm-physics dept.

DaFlusha writes "Chris Hecker has posted the freely downloadable games from Indie Game Jam 2 (actually the third year, as programmers start counting from 0). When the games (from the 'yearly game design and programming event designed to encourage experimentation and innovation in the game industry') were showcased during the Experimental Gameplay Workshop at GDC 2004, I was highly impressed and couldn't wait to play the 2D-physics-based games myself. Now everyone can try them, provided you can run a Windows executable." Oh, and any game description which starts with the phrase: "The physics engine treats the hamsters kinda like a fluid" (as 'Stunt Hamsters' does) is a friend of mine.

21 comments

  1. Linux is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    GNAA / Google confirms: Linux is dying. GNAA / Google confirms: Linux is dying.
    By GNAA Staff

    Here you have it: it's official; Google confirms: Desktop Linux is dying.

    Now, you might be thinking this is just another cut & paste troll based on the typical *BSD is dying bullshit.
    It isn't.
    As you might have know, your favorite search engine, Google, has been running a little statistics service, called "Zeitgeist".
    Since about a year ago, they started providing statistics of the operating systems used to access their search engine worldwide.
    I will let the numbers speak for themselves:

    Operating Systems Accessing Google in January 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in March 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in April 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in May 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in June 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in July 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in August 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in September 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in November 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in December 2002
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in January 2003
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in February 2003
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in April 2003
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in May 2003
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in June 2003
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in July 2003
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in August 2003
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in September 2003
    Operating Systems Accessing Google in November 2003

    If you've looked at even a few of these links, you don't need to be a Kreskin to predict Desktop Linux's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Desktop Linux faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for Linux on Desktop because Linux is dying. Things are looking very bad for Linux on Desktop. As many of us are already aware, Linux on Desktop continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

    According to Google Zeitgeist, there are about 80% of Internet Explorer 6 users. The only platform supporting Internet Explorer 6 is, of course, Microsoft Windows. These statistics are consistent with the earlier presented graphs of the operating systems used to access Google, with the Windows family consistently taking the top 3 ranks. Out of remaining 20%, the split is even between MSIE 5.5, MSIE 5.0,

    1. Re:Linux is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      They all (all 3 I saw) say 1% for Linux desktop, also wrt the browser statistics there seems to be an upsurge in fire-pandas a few weeks ago, any explanations?

  2. Bah, all cheap imitations by ObviousGuy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Now here's a real real-physics game.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:Bah, all cheap imitations by Xaymot · · Score: 1

      A financial donation for Truck Dismount?

      HAAAA!

      It is fun as hell though.

  3. Just a Little Twisted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    STUNT HAMSTERS

    No hamsters were harmed during the production of this game.
    Design by: Casey Muratori with Ryan Ellis

    The physics engine treats the hamsters kinda like a fluid. So you basically fire all these hamsters out of a cannon, and you pack them into different areas and then when you light them on fire, the gas that gets let out of that, displaces the fluid very violently. So you can change the structure of the level because this organic fluid explosion allows you to push blocks over and do these cool things.

  4. what is the minum requirementes 4 runningthis ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get a popup box everytime a sound even happens

  5. Chris Hecker is a god! by Chelloveck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When I was writing video games for a living, Hecker's physics articles in Game Developer magazine really helped me out. He knows what he's doing when it comes to this stuff. And, at least as important, he knows how to teach others to do it too.

    --
    Chelloveck
    I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
  6. Stunt Hamsters! by mrseigen · · Score: 1

    I'll have to look for whoever wrote this genius piece of work so I can thank them profusely, I've never had so much fun exploding large piles of rodent. :)

  7. So which year? by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 1
    actually the third year, as programmers start counting from 0

    Is this true or just some lame attempt at humor? I couldn't find any mention of it being the 3rd Game Jam, so I'm assuming this was meant as a joke. Unfortunately, the reasoning is kind of crazy: programmers don't start counting from zero, they just count offsets from the beginning of a list/array because it can be more efficient (doesn't matter nowadays, but it used to). This works out well since all integer types contain 0 as a number, so a single byte could address 8 elements instead of just 7. This contrasts with functions like strlen which count the characters in a string. strlen starts counting with 1 just like any sane human being. To summarize: the joke is not funny and untrue =)

    --
    True story.
    1. Re:So which year? by Mahrtian · · Score: 1

      This is the absolute truth. Check out the home page to read about IndieJam0 (massive sprite counts) and IndieJam1 (shadow interface).

      --

      --
    2. Re:So which year? by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 1

      Ah, thanks, I wasn't sure how to search for the zeroeth IndieJam. I still stand by my claim that programmers start counting with 1 and only start with 0 for storing offsets.

      --
      True story.
    3. Re:So which year? by PhoenixOne · · Score: 1
      Okay, this ties into my sig so I guess I should say something. ;)

      In C/C++ etc, we index things from zero. So, if you had an array of 50 IndieJams (indieJam[50]) you would access the first jam like so: indieJam[0];

      So, do we start counting with 0? That isn't the point really. I guess it is all a matter of context. Is it funny? Well that depends on your humor. If you laugh at the punchline to the "Two strings walk into a bar.." joke, then the answer is yes. ;)

      --
      Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
    4. Re:So which year? by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 1

      My point is that you don't start counting with 0 instead of 1, because then how would you count 0 items?

      In C/C++, you index array elements by their offset from the beginning as I stated before. There is no "counting" involved.

      --
      True story.
    5. Re:So which year? by ikkonoishi · · Score: 1

      null

    6. Re:So which year? by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 1

      NULL is usually defined to be zero, so no, that doesn't work. If you're returning a pointer, then yes, but that's not the same as counting.

      Never mind, though. No one seems to understand my point...

      --
      True story.
    7. Re:So which year? by AnotherFreakboy · · Score: 1

      Then there is the whole is zero a natural number thing.

      Mathematicians usually say no, it is defined to not be. The reason for this definition is that zero is a special case in terms of many rules (division for example) so having it not be a natural number makes many mathematical theorems work for natural numbers that would otherwise have a special case. Mathematicians don't like special cases.

      On the other hand Computer Scientists, among others, like to say yes, as it is possible to have zero of something (eg there are zero sheep in the room with me, at the moment) so zero should be a natural number. Having zero not be a natural number even though it is possible to have zero of something makes zero a special case. Computer Scientists don't like special cases.

      In the end it is more or less a matter of preference and convention. When in Maths-land ignore zero as it is inconvenient, when in CompSci-land take zero into account as your programs will likely crash otherwise.

      --
      Why not get the real ultimate power?
  8. Slashdotted! by MonkeyCookie · · Score: 1

    The site appears to be slashdotted already.

    Bummer :(

  9. Stunt Hamsters - Great Game! by jtriska · · Score: 1

    I just beat it. It was challenging, but not so challenging that it wasn't fun.

    I'd be really interested in learning if there's a tool or simple way to make levels for it though.

    It'd probably end up with a contributing community pretty quickly if the word got around.

    1. Re:Stunt Hamsters - Great Game! by DaFlusha · · Score: 1

      I don't know about Stunt Hamsters, but I know that many of the games support level editing. Just press "E" and you get a level editor in BootLooter, Nebulae, and a couple others.

    2. Re:Stunt Hamsters - Great Game! by misuba · · Score: 1

      How do you beat the last level? I'm stymied.

      --

      If you don't pretend to be anyone, are you?

    3. Re:Stunt Hamsters - Great Game! by illuin · · Score: 1

      Here's how I did it:

      Fill the whole bottom area with a sea of flaming hamsters. Make sure they cover the peak of the "mountain" in the middle.

      Next, you job is to shoot some hamsters up towards the movable rock, so that 2-3 hamsters get clumped together and fall down to the flaming sea together.

      The last part is to aim a hamster shot so that it is shooting as high on the rock as you can without hitting the ledge over the cannon. You need to time it so that this shot is directly above the mountain peak when the hampster clump is ignited. If all goes well, he "gas expansion" from the hampster-clump-explosion will give your just-shot hampster just that extra bit of lift he needs to make it over the rock and into the vortex.

      You have to do this 10 times to win, and it takes a while because it's quite tricky to get the clumping and timing just right. The timing the shot is possible if you put 97 hamster in the flaming sea, use 3 to build the clump, and then suck one of the flaming-sea-hamster up with the mouse just when you need to shoot.

      Maybe there's an easier way, but I just couldn't get that big rock to move far enough.