I find it runs a little choppy on my computer.. Typing response kinda slow.. I'm running it on windows xp could that be why? Besides that it's awesome! It is beyond my expectations, 800*600 @ 32bit?? Whoa! lol

The IDE can be slow at times, in the qb64.net forums you can download my custom editor, it has most of the functions that the official IDE has but also several enhancements. The download is at the bottom of all of my posts, just look for the alias Cyperium.

When I release the 1.95 version of my editor I will upload it here on qb45.com as well.

Cool editor! Not sure what it does exactly but it runs 10x faster than qb64 so I'm using it lol Writing code with slow response time was very time consuming lol Love your venture game! How long did it take to make? Solid code man I can't find any glitches, it runs nice :)

Thanks for the encouraging remarks :)

The Venture game took 3 years to make, and I'm not finished yet, I did have a period of a year when I didn't work on it though. I designed a directqb port to QB64 in order to get my game to work on modern computers and since then I'm actively developing it for QB64. It is far from finished but I'll release another demo version in a while :)

I can't wait until you release it! Once I figure out how to rotate & zoom images quickly & easily I'll be able to make a hi-res first person engine! This DQB port would help a lot! Really good efforts from what I've seen so far! One question, when you're done with your DQB functions, would you be adding them to the QB64editor's command list? Is that even possible?

My first approach when releasing the DQB functions will be to create a directqb.bi file. There are some problems with this approach however;

1) QB64 doesn't place the subs/functions at the bottom of the code, but places them wherever the '$include is placed.

2) Subs/functions must be placed after all other code in order to work.

3) Old source always has the '$include:'directqb.bi' at the beginning of the code.

To further complicate this I need to initialise the library, so either I have to make two files (directqb.bi - for initialisation to be placed at the beginning, and directqb.bm - for the subs/functions to be placed at the end) OR I can make my editor automatically place subs/functions at the end no matter where the '$include is, however if I go for the second option I break compatibility with the default QB64 editor, and if I go with the first I make it hard to use...so I'm having a bit of a tie here :), I guess I'm kind of hoping that Galleon will make the call to place subs/functions found in a '$include file at the end automatically. I've adressed this several times to him so we'll see where we get at.

Your suggestion is valid though and I'll think about it, but I'd rather that the DQB functions becomes available to all, not just the ones using my editor.

hmmm... How about making an editor specifically designed to make games? That would be cool :) easy graphics routines, controls, stuff like that. Kinda like AGS, ever heard of it? www.bigbluecup.com LOL just bored, thought I'd throw some more suggestions out there.

Oops

I played with Games Factory and Klick&Play a lot when I was younger so it might be something that I'll try later on :)

I will continue to add features in my editor that might be good to have while making games also, like the ASCII character set which now also features _KEYDOWN codes for all the characters :), _KEYDOWN is good for tracking several keys at once (so you can move while jumping for example).

I remember Games Factory and Klik & Play. I first learned how to use GameMaker (back when it was free). What I liked about GameMaker was that it combined the use of drag-and-drop game editing (especially if you didn't know how to write code at the time) and scripting so if you did know coding, you could do things on a complicated level. Plus it let you bundle games into EXEs so you could play them on any computer. Man, those were the days.

Yes, those were the days, I remember I used score as a variable for other things :), I had to use tricks like that as Games Factory didn't allow too many variables (at least not that I knew about).

Me and my friend made some kind of Mario game in it which was actually quite playable :)

I tried the Games Factory but it wasn't that fun because I got the trial version and it seemed a lot like GameMaker except not free. :-P

I remember making some games in GameMaker that were actually quite interesting. I made one where flying heads of Bill Gates would follow your cursor and you had to click on them to give them money (the cursor was a dollar bill). Then you had to avoid flying bills that flew in a straight line and shot out small pieces of paper called "debts" and then killed you upon contact.

I should dig those up and put them somewhere online. They're not entirely amazing but I had fun making them and playing them.

I'll try the Lite version of Game Maker for the fun of it :) (don't know how I missed that one, I was always looking for game creation stuff).

Would like to try that Bill Gates game so provide the link if you publish it somewhere :)

I will sometime today or tomorrow. Also I have a copy of the old GameMaker I used to use (version 4.2 I believe) which doesn't require a serial number and has all features enabled. I think GameMaker Lite puts nag screens in your games if I'm not mistaken. I remember it was free for a while and then it just turned into shareware. Heck I remember seeing GameMaker 1.1 in a game programming book. ^_^

I started out making some simple games for my C16 and later C64, so I'm pretty used to making games, even at those days.

I was a bit disappointed with QBasic since it wasn't 100% compatible with the older BASIC versions that I was used to. BUT I studied the help file, and at that time I used to spend all days and nights just learning new commands in QB. That was around the time that I learned about the "automatic" game development using Games Factory and Klik&Play. It was pretty good. But could never overrule my fundamental interest in having control of everything. I guess that if I had been born earlier I would have known Assembly and would have sticked with that instead of QB...let's just say that I don't regret being born later ;).

Having full control without having to worry about each and every thing is something that certainly appeals to me and what I think BASIC is all about. It enables me to do the most fantastic things, without having to worry too much about HOW to do it!

About the directqb library:

In the future Galleon is planning to automatically place the subs/functions found in a include file at the end of the code. This enables me to make a single directqb.bi file that will be fully compatible with old source using directqb.

Read Galleons reply here: .bi SUB/FUNCTION automatic placement to the end of document?