Lovely, just lovely. This will be a great toy to play with. While it's still early, I'd like to hear your arguments for or against the idea of separating mechanism from interface, such that the (for lack of a better term) "logic unit" can be decoupled from screen drawing, for example. This way, you can install the brain into different places - chatbots, a scripting option within inform, etc.

Hello Unseen, nice to un-see... you on these forums! (SMF = Simple "machine" forums if you want a pun with double cheese.)

Anyway, I am long aware of the points you raise both here and over at *.net. The question is: why won't people use pre-made tools, made specifically *for* their purposes, in favor of rolling their own shitty version that will never be finished? There are a few answers to this that I know of, and I won't dare try to spell them out. Half of the reasons are deeply Freudian. Let me instead zoom right into solution-think.

Speaking from the heart of the peanut gallery, our collective advice to you is to shove the work down our throats. Bulldog it a little more. If we run into trouble, we want you to be *right* there to hold hands. This isn't just the pipe dream of the novice - even the experts want support. (Demanding, I know.) One weird issue is  many people feel their questions are too stupid to post publicly on the forums - concerning enough for Odin to *almost* allow for anonymous posting on this site.

Another side point to hit on is website format. [abandoned, outdated and now likely malicious qb64 dot net website - don’t go there] had none, zip, zero. There was essentially no way to keep a project alive beyond bumping it on the forums. A catch-22, because a perfect program speaks for itself, does not need comments, and is then forgotten entirely. The old *.net forums are PACKed with solutions to various things, and today's wave of hobbyists is completely unaware of just how recently their same wheel had been invented. (I don't want to see collision detection discussed any more as an unsolved issue, ever.) Qb64.org solves the problem in spades. What we (mostly Odin) plan to do is showcase various projects front-and-center on the *.org homepage, and if that doesn't flag down enough attention, maybe a special spot on the front of the Forums page as well.

Of all the long-term QB64 projects out there, I can hardly name anyone beyond Fellippe whose projects belong on the front page. That is, besides you. GDK should be ignored no longer if given proper publicity. Speaking of that, do you have a website for your projects? Any indicator that convinces people that the project is alive and well is a plus.

Final note: The #qb64 IRC channel is a place where tons of light-hearted horseplay takes place. Come spend the rest of your live with us!

Welcome aboard, roadbloc. Glad to see you found us here. It's been a little while since I've given your (latest) game a go (not counting a few years back.) If my darn office would calm down I could boot up QB64 without turning too many heads.

(Who am I kidding? I turn heads anyways.)

Thanks for keeping us posted bplus. I was going to respond over at the "other" forum but didn't because... reasons... namely all of my posts need to be approved first. Still waiting for a few posts (from days ago) to make it past the admin over there. No telling what a PG-13 site would do with a title like BrainFuck. Ya know, the same place that throws me ads for mail-in Thai brides. Very child-friendly as a concept.

Hiya Aureal,

I had to double-take your name cause there is a guy around going by "Aurel". Anyway, welcome aboard and nice program. A handful of folks work on similar things, some right this minute for all I know. Keybone works in a very similar direction in particular.

If you can bear to integrate IRC into your culture, we hang out a #qb64 on freenode.
Use http://www.qb64.org/ircpage.html for starters if you don't have a client.

Anyway, keep up the good work and keep us in the LOOP (no pun, but yes pun).

Hello Ashish -

I like it. Thanks for posting! I noticed that maaaaybe the wheels have a little slip to them, and at low speeds below .8 they do some funny things. I see why you did that on purpose - no worries.

If (and for the moment, only if) the "noise" of the road is not *too* steep and crazy - kindof like the settings you are demonstrating, I might suggest calculating the rotation angle of each wheel not with velocity, but with position. I modified the code for the front wheel only to demonstrate this - you can see that it doesn't want to slip like that back one does.

To generalize the method for all kinds of curves that go upside down and stuff, that can be done too.

Anyway, compare the front and back wheels: