So today, I downloaded (after a bit trouble... First set of downloads i tried gave me a 0 byte file that when run would give errors... Finally I was lucky and clicked the download at the right time... Wierd.) Greenfoot today. Greenfoot is a Java IDE with a graphical editor (Ussually you have to just type every line of code, then hope your coordinates are good.) It also has some built in methods like move() and rotate() which also help speed things up. Now for the reviews.
First Time (remember, not simplicity, its being able to know what you are doing, on the first run/)
---------------------------------------------------
Scratch- My first run (4 years ago
) I had no clue what to do... Look at my first project, spider pig and robot chicken was winning
Yet i had no clue how i did it. Luckily downloading and examining projects enabled me to learn fast. 7/10
Greenfoot- Once you start it up for the first time, you get a nice list of tutorials, along with the create a new scenario (project) button and a load button. I clicked on the tutorial, and went through it. I now have a basic idea of how the program works (and of course prior knowledge in Java (its how i roll)). 9/10
Simplicity
---------------------------------------------------
Scratch- All i need to do is drag, drop, draw, and do (run the program) Its so easy, a caveman can do it, yet you can accomplish many things (really, look at my 3d engines, that there is REAL 1990's style 3d
) A bit difficult to pick up as a first language, but you get it. 9.5/10
Greenfoot- All you need to do is right click and add objects, pick images, name the objects (or java classes as they really are) yet then you must type code. A bit more advanced (a lot) than scratch, but easier than real Java (they give you methods to make games easier (the program is made for games/sims)) for example, in scratch you would do the block set:
when (space) key pressed
move (5) steps
while in Greenfoot (not java) you would type
public void move() {
move();
}
As you can see, more memory is needed in Greenfoot. Makes it a bit less simple. 7.5/10
Flexibility
-----------------------------------
Scratch: Scratch is about the least flexible you can get. You can use their blocks (or make your own, which is a bit difficult for the average scratcher.) These blocks can be put together to make movement, colors, etc. But thats about it. The only thing less flexible would be a paint program. 5/10
Greenfoot: Greenfoot is as simple as... well Greenfoot (explained earlier) yet as flexible as the whole Java programming language (do anything Java can do) meaning you can make save systems, or online games, or 3d simulations even, anything you can put your mind to. Of course, java cant do ANYTHING computers are capable of, but it can do a lot. 9.5/10
GUI/layout
----------------------------------------
Scratch: This will be a short one on both ends. Scratches gui is obvious and easy to go around, i knew what to do gui wise on my first run. 9/10
Greenfoot: Greenfoot's gui is a bit more advanced (need to read a tutorial to know you need to right click the parent classes to add something to them.) But still simple enough. 7/10
Deploying
---------------------------------------
Scratch: Scratch games can be deployed with the click of a button, then the filling of a form, then another click, then a loading screen. Sometimes it glitches, but rarely does it. About as simple as you can get. 9.8/10
Greenfoot: Greenfoot can be deployed with the click of a button, same as scratch, but that only deploys onto the greenfoot website (like scratch) which doesnt allow you to use some of the more advanced java methods (text files, online games, etc.) Which i'm bringing the rating down for, as its a bit more difficult to deploy onto a separate website for the absolute beginner. 8.7/10
Quality
--------------------------------
Scratch: Most scratch games/programs are of... poor quality... Bad graphics, bad ideas, incomplete programs. Mostly because of the simplicity (i started at age 9) and un-flexibility (word?) of the scratch engine. Scratch games can also lag a lot. 6/10
Greenfoot: most of the greenfoot games i've played have fair graphics, and good programming. This is because the advanced engine calls for more mature users, so they dont just scribble a circle with a few lines coming out, and then throw it onto a screen and say its the next best scratch game (i did the same, not blaming yall.) Also being done with java, there is a bit of lag, but because most games arent huge, it doesnt affect them. 8.9/10
Conclusion
------------------------------------
Scratch: Scratch... Imagine, program, share... All you need to do. Sometimes the imagine part is skipped, and other times the program part is skipped. Scratch is simple and fun, but lacks flexibility. Overall, about an 8.2/10
Greenfoot: Greenfoot is a mix between Scratch and Java (maybe more of a GMK and Java.) Its simple compared to real java, but harder than scratch. Not good for those who want to make their imagination a reality in a short amount of time, but good for those who want to make fun games, faster than traditional programming. About a 8.7/10
Now lets tally up the scores: Scratch: 54.5
Greenfoot: 59.3
Looks like Greenfoot has a slight lead on Scratch. Now lets give scratch some kudos for being good for the little ones. +4 on scratch, giving it a 58.5, making it not that much worse than Greenfoot.
Think something in heres wrong? Please tell me. Think i'm wrong? TELL ME!
Offline
lukanater wrote:
Flexibility
-----------------------------------
Scratch: Scratch is about the least flexible you can get. You can use their blocks (or make your own, which is a bit difficult for the average scratcher.) These blocks can be put together to make movement, colors, etc. But thats about it. The only thing less flexible would be a paint program. 5/10
Greenfoot: Greenfoot is as simple as... well Greenfoot (explained earlier) yet as flexible as the whole Java programming language (do anything Java can do) meaning you can make save systems, or online games, or 3d simulations even, anything you can put your mind to. Of course, java cant do ANYTHING computers are capable of, but it can do a lot. 9.5/10
What? You can make OS simulations in Scratch...
You can not access the filesystem... the current time... other programs... but you can SIMULATE them! You can make a filesystem in Scratch, you can make a timer in scratch, you can simulate almost anything in scratch!
Offline
@lukanater probably next time u will come and compare Scratch with C++
mate its like this scratch and greenfoot are two differnt scenarios , scratch is made to provide every1 the usability & fun to program
green foot is designed to ease som1 who wants to learn / has learnt java
and i prefer notepad++ , Visual Studio , Apatana web IDE's over drag and drop ones when it comes to realworld coding
...
scratch is for fun! its to make the learning slope easier !
u cant compare greenfoot to Core C++ will ya ? the same way u cant compare scratch to greenfoot .
Last edited by fanofcena (2011-07-11 02:33:08)
Offline
I just know some people here say Scratch is too easy, this will allow them to see which one is better for them.
What? You can make OS simulations in Scratch...
You can not access the filesystem... the current time... other programs... but you can SIMULATE them! You can make a filesystem in Scratch, you can make a timer in scratch, you can simulate almost anything in scratch!
Can you save this information so when you boot the Scratch OS again you will be able to use it?
Offline
This is kinda like comparing Toy-Story to Spiderman.
Offline
fanofcena wrote:
@lukanater probably next time u will come and compare Scratch with C++
Well, actually, I have already compared Scratch with Python 3.1.
Offline
08jackt wrote:
yeah i just use scratch in my spare time for fun now
nice review, ill check green foot out now, sounds good![]()
so will i. sounds real good. thx for the assessment, lukenater.
Offline
lukanater wrote:
Meaning toy-story wins? Spider man sucks
![]()
No, I'm just makin the point that it's subjective.
Offline
I'm currently working on a game called Venture, the player joins and it generates a completely random map, 100/100 pixels wide (can expand it though.) With water and [remove]. They can explore. Imagine minecraft but more of an RPG... And no sweet underground [remove]
Last edited by cheddargirl (2011-07-11 23:14:24)
Offline
lukanater wrote:
I'm currently working on a game called Venture, the player joins and it generates a completely random map, 100/100 pixels wide (can expand it though.) With water and [removed]. They can explore. Imagine minecraft but more of an RPG... And no sweet underground [removed]
![]()
Water and [removed]?
I'm sorry, but [removed] wouldn't make a very good platform.
Try dirt.
Last edited by cheddargirl (2011-07-11 23:13:48)
Offline
I don't like the kudos at the end. Doesn't seem fair.
Offline
MaxtheWeirdo wrote:
I don't like the kudos at the end. Doesn't seem fair.
1+
Offline
bananaman114 wrote:
lukanater wrote:
I'm currently working on a game called Venture, the player joins and it generates a completely random map, 100/100 pixels wide (can expand it though.) With water and [removed]. They can explore. Imagine minecraft but more of an RPG... And no sweet underground [removed]
![]()
Water and [removed]?
I'm sorry, but [removed] wouldn't make a very good platform.
Try dirt.
Sorry, apparently scratch censors swearing... The actual word was synonymous to junk and starts with C.
I don't like the kudos at the end. Doesn't seem fair.
Its fair. I sort of based the whole thing on pure logic, trying not to be bias, and i did that at the end because obviously i would be slightly bias to my favorite (greenfoot.)
Last edited by cheddargirl (2011-07-11 23:15:06)
Offline
lukanater wrote:
bananaman114 wrote:
lukanater wrote:
I'm currently working on a game called Venture, the player joins and it generates a completely random map, 100/100 pixels wide (can expand it though.) With water and [removed]. They can explore. Imagine minecraft but more of an RPG... And no sweet underground [removed]
![]()
Water and [removed]?
I'm sorry, but [removed] wouldn't make a very good platform.
Try dirt.Sorry, apparently scratch censors swearing... The actual word was synonymous to junk and starts with C.
I don't like the kudos at the end. Doesn't seem fair.
Its fair. I sort of based the whole thing on pure logic, trying not to be bias, and i did that at the end because obviously i would be slightly bias to my favorite (greenfoot.)
I thought it seemed biased towards Scratch.
Last edited by cheddargirl (2011-07-11 23:15:45)
Offline
You need to compare to Scratch 2.0 when it comes out. It's going to be tons better
Offline
lukanater wrote:
I just know some people here say Scratch is too easy, this will allow them to see which one is better for them.
What? You can make OS simulations in Scratch...
You can not access the filesystem... the current time... other programs... but you can SIMULATE them! You can make a filesystem in Scratch, you can make a timer in scratch, you can simulate almost anything in scratch!Can you save this information so when you boot the Scratch OS again you will be able to use it?
You can by just saving the scratch project
Offline
maxskywalker wrote:
fanofcena wrote:
@lukanater probably next time u will come and compare Scratch with C++
Well, actually, I have already compared Scratch with Python 3.1.
bahahahhahaha.... what were the results ? 10 vs 1 lol
Offline