I think that certain people *cough* rotInMilc *cough*, probably haven't even given gm a decent go yet.
In fact, I think that many of the people who claim that gml isn't a real language, and isn't as viable as other languages to sustain a game making career, probably haven't given game maker a proper go either.

Lets outline a few facts here:
Game maker is capable of doing basically everything that an independent game maker would need.
+ If game maker is missing any functions, that other languages have, it can be expanded with dlls etc to do other things.

Coding everything from scratch, using c++, takes a very very long time for an independent game programmer.
Using the game maker interface, a programmer can have a game done in less than half the time that it would take in c++

If a programmer seeks advice/help with c++ coding, there is far less support readily available to help you (unless you want to pay for it).
If anyone needs to seek advice with gml language, there is a huge community base out there, providing help for beginner/novice levels, up to advanced programming, and dll expansion.


Summary:

Unless you are planning on programming to such extremes as a mainstream game like Call of duty (lets face it, no independent game maker ever will),
Game maker will give you the tools to get your games made allot faster, and provides you with as much functionality, flexibility, as you are going to need.

So for an independent game maker, which one is going to sustain a career better?
With a much faster production speed, and as much functionality as any independent game maker will need, GM would be the obvious choice between the two.

I think that if anyone is "naive", it would be those who refuse to use a tool like GM, to improve their game making speed, and keep the same quality, or better than when they used C++, especially if they haven't given GM a proper go yet.

This thread got a bit silly last time and I hope to avoid any name calling or un-GPWiki-like behaviour in future discussions.

FWIW, I think game builder packages get a bad rap because that's where most people start out. Once they've got some experience and a language or two under their belts, they probably feel like they've moved beyond such things. I'm sure that today's game construction tools are far more sophisticated than the stuff I used to get frustrated with on the Amiga.

Also, DirectX, XNA and even OpenGL are to some degree, bolt-together kits for graphics and gaming (OK, OpenGL is stretching it a bit there, but you get the idea). No one wants to start from scratch when writing a game. I spent many years fighting with DOS, interrupts and old PHIGS documents before finally embracing a graphics API and giving up the 'roll your own' mentality. So yes, pre-built libraries and tools are great, much of the work is done for you. However, you have to spend some time getting to know them.

I think GameMaker's biggest problem is that people with experience don't want to invest time in yet another API or package. We all have our favourite APIs and we've chosen them because they suit our needs. I'm glad GM suits you, but I personally don't have the time to update my knowledge of things I already know (OpenGL again ), never mind starting out in a whole new environment, no matter what promises it makes. It was the same with Python and any number of other 'next big things' that have come before.

Maybe I will code myself into a corner with my stubborn ways, but if GM is as good as people say, I'm sure it will gain traction. However, the majority of users will probably be new to the area, rather than those turned back from Java or C/C++/C#.

My other point is around flexibility. Game programming is fun, but most people who start out in game coding won't end up in a game studio. My early c/c++ stuff was graphical and game based, it was a good way or learning the basics. Since then I've written NT services for hardware temperature monitors, database and file system utilities and even a secure memory erase tool for a military jet (I'll post a picture of the debug session for that some time ). I'm pretty sure if I'd stuck with AMOS or Click 'n Play, I wouldn't have managed quite as much in my career.

[edit] Woah! Wall of rambling text, here's a tl,dr:
1 . Most established coders don't have the time (or inclination) to learn a new thing.
2. I'd advise against putting all your eggs in one basket.

_________________
10 PRINT "Bad Monkey ";
20 GOTO 10

Hey tommo020788!

Just to clear things up perhaps... I will concede that I haven't given GM a decent go. Technically I HAVE used GM quite a bit, but that was back in the 1.0 days (in the early 1990s IIRC), and GM has grown by leaps and bounds by then, I am certain.

I don't know if I specifically said GML is not a "real language", but it seems out of character for me. I've always been one to say that language doesn't matter -- C++ is just as capable of making a game as is HTML (even without HTML5 standards and JavaScript). Different degrees of capabilities, but games are possible with both (and yes, I know HTML is a markup language, as opposed to a program language). But HTML is still viable for some types of games. I don't have enough experience with GML to compare it with C++ or any other language, but I don't believe I (intentionally) meant to say that GML was bad in any way (just that it has its own unique pros and cons, as would any method).

I think that is all I personally have to say that is relevant. I'm sorry I came off too harsh, as it was not my intention. I just have problems with words (as in I'm good with rhetoric, but expressing my thoughts properly is hit-and-miss).

EDIT

Oh, and I am rotInMilc, just in case my new persona might catch you off-guard.

_________________
What most people don't understand about "enlightenment" is that it is not an end-goal; but where you find yourself just before taking a new "first step."

You can use Game Maker, but I'd suggest everyone learns a different language than GML. And how is GML at all powerful? That's either a lie, or an enthusiasm-sourced misunderstanding.

_________________
What most people don't understand is what I like to explain as a thing that I understand.

If you can achieve what you want in a given language, there's really no need to use something different. To each his own so to speak.

If someone makes a fun platformer or rpg(or whatever else) in game maker, thats fine. It doesn't matter what it is made in. There is no reason to shoutout flames like 'it is not a real language', 'you just clicked it together' or whatever else insults there might be. The outcome is what matters. People should get over their bias and embrace that there are tools that help cutting down the amount of work to achieve a goal, even if it has it's drawbacks or lack of flexibility (which i am not implying gml has, just generally speaking).

_________________
Long pork is people!

wzl's burrow

I've never really gravitated towards these sorts of things, personally. If there's people out there enjoying Game Maker and having some success with it, then I think that's great but I'l stick with a "standard" programming language myself. The reason I guess is mostly because of this: (straight from the website)

"GameMaker allows you to make exciting computer games, without the need to write a single line of code."

That's really great/easy/accessible but when you either a) Have a very specific idea of what you want to achieive in your game or b) want the freedom to do whatever you want at any given time, i think that kindof setup would feel restrictive. I'd feel like I'm sailing in a "pond" of possibilities, vs. an "ocean" of possibilities with a standard language which is essentially only restricted to my creativity/expertise with said language.

Regardless. Not to say that I'l never try it, I may one day just for the hell of it. For now though, C#/XNA makes me feel both completely free and empowered so I'l stick with that for the forseeable future.

_________________
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society."
"Hope is the first step on the road to dissapointment." -Jonah Orion
http://tankzgame.blogspot.com

The point is not achieving, its learning. "GML Why To Use It + A First Lesson"

I have experience around the typical users of Game Maker. Even some of the most talented GML programmers tend to lack an understanding of a number of fundamental principles (including my past self), which is a huge shame. I wouldn't blame this problem on them just being new programmers. I myself recall having these issues stick with me for many years, until I first started learning new languages such as C. Within a few weeks of using & learning C, I had made some important realizations which would never had happened if I had kept using Game Maker. The nature of your favorite languages can determine whether you're a good programmer or not. Although GML is okay as your first language, it greatly improves your experience to learn lower-level stuff. Of course moving to C wasn't easy, but despite the usual struggles of learning, my first few months with it were a total blast. That makes me think, I should do "just-for-fun & experience" projects more often.

_________________
What most people don't understand is what I like to explain as a thing that I understand.

The goal of the people using frameworks and toolsets like gamemaker are most likely not after becoming a good programmer, but have an idea for a game they will try to implement, by whatever means. They don't care if it's good practice or if it's limiting and thats fine by me. I don't deem them ignorant because they don't 'know better' or rather care not enough about being restricted in such ways. It's a way for them express themselves.

If they plan to go further they will eventually end up venturing into other territories learning what's necessary on their way.

_________________
Long pork is people!

wzl's burrow

@weezl
I don't deem them ignorant either. Some people like to stay as practical as possible. Regarding the obtainment of a rich comprehension of complexity and possibility, it is not practical to keep your head in the concrete-bucket. We all have different paradigms of functioning. You may try to experience what you wish. I wouldn't say many people with the mindset you regard would first discover Game Maker by this topic in these forums. People who begin to use Game Maker are usually people throwing some Google searches on "how to make games."

A wiki's goal is to be comprehensive and complete. I anticipate the majority of The Game Programming Wiki's visitors to be those with a strong desire to learn about game development. So for these visitors, starting with Game Maker is not a bad idea at all. Though, our context is "GML," so our subject is scripting/programming languages. Regarding that, Game Maker is not the best for programming-particular learning purposes, yet its excellent as an introduction to game development, including fundamental game design and the basics related to game development practices. Learning GML as your first programming experience doesn't hurt either, but I would rather have oriented this topic as: "Beginning Game Development with Game Maker."

_________________
What most people don't understand is what I like to explain as a thing that I understand.