Original Summary

I put a small iOS game on the App Store last week and needed a website for it. Instead of exporting screenshots and sprite sheets, I wrote an exporter. The game has no image files. Its asset catalogue holds the app icon and nothing else. Every sprite is an array of strings in the Swift source, next to a dictionary that says what each letter means: K is the outline, R is the bike red, B is the suit blue. A drawing routine walks the rows and fills one square per character. The exporter reads those same Swift files and writes them out as JSON: 177 sprites and a palette of 36 colours. The site loads that JSON and runs the same drawing routine in JavaScript. So the motorbike you scroll past is not a screenshot and not a redrawing. It is the same data through the same algorithm, and when I change the game and re-run the exporter, the site changes with it. There is a third copy of the routine in Python, written separately on purpose, and a page that renders the parts both ways and compares them pixel by pixel. Comparing the drawing only against itself would not have proved anything. You can open the exported data yourself, which is the only reason the claim is worth making: Site: https://revrush.net/ How it's made: https://revrush.net/how-its-made/ The sprites: https://revrush.net/data/sprites.json What it costs, since that is the part that decides whether it is a good idea for anyone else: you cannot see a sprite until it is rendered, there is no art tool anywhere in the loop, and every new element is a code change instead of a file. It only pays for itself because the art is pixel art on a fixed grid, where a scaled bitmap falls apart anyway.   submitted by   /u/MarkoKrulc [link]   [comments]

  • 情报分类：商业与市场研究
  • 分类依据：内容涉及商业、投资或市场动态
  • 信息来源：Reddit · SideProject
  • 发布时间：2026/9/20 22:31:38