Comment on Unity tutorial contents

Stop it with the drama. You hurt no one. We aren't therapists and this is not some bad afternoon soap opera. You were ahead when you apologized for your behavior.

 

I'll open a new thread and speak properly. Then maybe the others will have a better mood to reply. It's spoilt for the day.

 

Sure, for things like "3D shape = model" the terms are standard. But lately junk scripting terms crept in: auto-properties, delegates, every sort of design pattern, expression-bodied functions, weird hand-waving about best practices, pages on proper style. In the old days a total novice could read the manual and look up the rest. But anymore, it's 1/2 technobabble on the scripting side. As far as the OP, they only wrote "concepts and principles" over and over, so... .

 

I always thought they were hiring too many MS enterprise coders who fancied themselves game engine engineers. They can take their compsci jargon and trickeries and shove it. I can see them grinning and patting themselves on the back for finally being able to implement that BS they learned in class seven of the third year of their compsci classes. I just had an almost completed project blow up all to hell. I did nothing diff from when it worked two hours back except add a function and two members of an array.[4 years on "Tail Of The Dragon" real world motorcycle run.. on the final stretch before release] Gonna cost me hours I don't have or rebuild from the ground up. Some fool in QA will send me boilerplate cut and paste replies like they did from decemeber through march on another project which stopped that dead in its tracks. And the OP thinks he has problems to create melodrama about. heh.

 

I won't be responding anymore. I'll move on to new ones and learn other things. I also apologize to those who wasted their time responding to the argument here.

 

LOL!

 

The annoying thing is, it's generally not ComSci jargon. I think people read some nonsense about using SOLID to create an inventory system and figure "if that's ComSci, there's no way I'm reading a textbook". That's like judging doctors by listening to Dr. Oz.

State Machines are a fun example. For real they're a theoretical thing for proofs, and come in several equally correct flavors. Some can be in several states at once, or you can split it into several smaller ones which run in parallel -- whatever helps with a particular problem. There are even algorithms to transform the types. When you read people arguing about the true way to program a State Machine for a practical problem, that's not ComSci.

 

I came back to comment on this. The fact that they didn't reply shows they are not willing to pardon me. I made a bad mistake but i won't be pardoned by them. I will take my time learning the manuals. Then I will decide how to leave. That's all.

 

. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .“~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./…..\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>–==“
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`\.

 

I agree. I probably should have used compsci techno-babble. An expression bodied function is a girl with a sexy walk..on purpose. Auto-properties are the class variables for my AutomobileController. Or a local car dealer. AFAIC

 

ffs, it's because you're being dramatic I didn't come back. You were dramatic in the sense you were insulting people before and now you're being dramatic because you're acting like you've been banished to the Phantom Zone and have to spend the rest of your life spinning around in a flat piece of geometry in space.


There's nothing left to say, that's why nobody came back.

 

What do you mean? There's lots more. The OP wrote this: "These tutorials (meaning those not in unity forum) are complete and independent - meaning that you can write an app immediately." What does that mean?

I've seen books that walk you through making a complete game. But a little internet tutorial doing that? Maybe pong. Plus, most people who finish those complain that they didn't really learn anything. They feel as if they bought a game from Ikea.

 

Those books are typically books because they walk you through all the tech stuff and I was specifically referring to the people the OP was talking about in the quoted post.