Yes, Boo is compiled Python, targeted at the .NET platform.
Java: JMonkeyEngine, lwjgl, Jake2 and aren't there even Ogre wrappers for Java? Somebody was able to create a game like Tribal Trouble in Java, for me that is as much of a good credibility reference as I need.
Yes, C# is a beautiful language. It's only problem for me is that Apple is not supporting it and the Novell implementation is not good enough on OS X. That pretty much ends the discussion for me, even though I would LOVE to use it. But I doubt that Miguel de Icaza's group will ever get there, for those reasons:
1. They don't really care for OS X. (In fact, Miguel has posted quite a lot of Apple bashing on the web.) They also do not really care for any platform other than SuSE Linux. (Why should they? That's the one that pays their salaries.) Ultimately, only a fistful of Mono developers really work on OS X, and for such a huge project, that's simply not enough. Which leads here:
2. They do not have Microsoft's or Sun's or IBM's man power to really support so many different platforms, even if they wanted to.
3. They do not even have enough man power to implement and deliver a feature complete .NET platform. They are playing catch-up with Microsoft. Sure, it is officialy not their goal to deliver a full .NET implementation, but it actually hurts them on the long run not to have a full platform in the offer.
4. They actually do not have ANY support from other companies at all. In the industry, Java still is the #1 multi-platform solution, and nobody is really interested in changing that. All of the industry's efforts are put behind Java, not .NET, not Mono, not Python, not Perl, not PHP, not Ruby.
The really fascinating thing about C# and .NET is that all the people who really, really bash Java for some strange reason seem to like the Microsoft .NET platform instead, which ultimately is nothing else but a different flavour of the same technology and philosophy that are behind Java with a lot of the same problems and issues.
The only real difference between the two is that Java is already running full steam on all possible platforms.
--------------------------------
I am not sure, though, whether the entire discussion really is about games only. For me, it is not, and probably some others here also talk about it from a different perspective than from 'games-only'. I'm interested in games and their development, but that is just a part of the whole picture, and that is the reason why I'm interested in multi purpose languages, and not just domain specific solutions.
The folks here that advocate C++ are mainly after the system stuff, because in the end writing high performance engines -is- systems stuff. On the other hand, I know some very professional C++ developers who never were interested in going into the game industry because they found it boring "to just shovel around memory quick enough", to quote one of them.
Anyway, you are absolutely right that in the end only the result counts. Whatever makes you happy while getting there, use it.
Time for some coffee. :)
PS: I am NOT trying to convince anybody about anything here. I am especially NOT trying to tell people not to use BlitzMax. Whenever I have my own doubts about BlitzMax, I launch oddball's PhysLite samples and immediately experience that warm feeling for BlitzMax again. ;-)
Java: JMonkeyEngine, lwjgl, Jake2 and aren't there even Ogre wrappers for Java? Somebody was able to create a game like Tribal Trouble in Java, for me that is as much of a good credibility reference as I need.
Yes, C# is a beautiful language. It's only problem for me is that Apple is not supporting it and the Novell implementation is not good enough on OS X. That pretty much ends the discussion for me, even though I would LOVE to use it. But I doubt that Miguel de Icaza's group will ever get there, for those reasons:
1. They don't really care for OS X. (In fact, Miguel has posted quite a lot of Apple bashing on the web.) They also do not really care for any platform other than SuSE Linux. (Why should they? That's the one that pays their salaries.) Ultimately, only a fistful of Mono developers really work on OS X, and for such a huge project, that's simply not enough. Which leads here:
2. They do not have Microsoft's or Sun's or IBM's man power to really support so many different platforms, even if they wanted to.
3. They do not even have enough man power to implement and deliver a feature complete .NET platform. They are playing catch-up with Microsoft. Sure, it is officialy not their goal to deliver a full .NET implementation, but it actually hurts them on the long run not to have a full platform in the offer.
4. They actually do not have ANY support from other companies at all. In the industry, Java still is the #1 multi-platform solution, and nobody is really interested in changing that. All of the industry's efforts are put behind Java, not .NET, not Mono, not Python, not Perl, not PHP, not Ruby.
The really fascinating thing about C# and .NET is that all the people who really, really bash Java for some strange reason seem to like the Microsoft .NET platform instead, which ultimately is nothing else but a different flavour of the same technology and philosophy that are behind Java with a lot of the same problems and issues.
The only real difference between the two is that Java is already running full steam on all possible platforms.
--------------------------------
I am not sure, though, whether the entire discussion really is about games only. For me, it is not, and probably some others here also talk about it from a different perspective than from 'games-only'. I'm interested in games and their development, but that is just a part of the whole picture, and that is the reason why I'm interested in multi purpose languages, and not just domain specific solutions.
The folks here that advocate C++ are mainly after the system stuff, because in the end writing high performance engines -is- systems stuff. On the other hand, I know some very professional C++ developers who never were interested in going into the game industry because they found it boring "to just shovel around memory quick enough", to quote one of them.
Anyway, you are absolutely right that in the end only the result counts. Whatever makes you happy while getting there, use it.
Time for some coffee. :)
PS: I am NOT trying to convince anybody about anything here. I am especially NOT trying to tell people not to use BlitzMax. Whenever I have my own doubts about BlitzMax, I launch oddball's PhysLite samples and immediately experience that warm feeling for BlitzMax again. ;-)