?

[BeginnerSFML]

?

[N_K]

Although I doubt we need a "Creating a platformer from the ground up" tutorial on the wiki, I agree that SFML needs some more specific tutorials.

For example, a tutorial about the basic principles/implementation of an efficient tile engine. Tile engines are versatile, and are the core of many 2D games, yet there are no tutorials about how to create a vertex array based tile engine with SFML. A working example can be put together after searching this forum, but it could take quite a few trial-and-errors to figure out how exactly it works.

[eXpl0it3r]

I'm sure you didn't mean it like this, but for me thos sounds quite like: 'Can someone write a platformer, which I can copy then, so I don't have to program it?'
I doubt that you're really that familiar with programming in C++, otherwise you'd understand the depth of such a task.
I also think you're wrong with thinking that the hard part is to get the idea to code, the hard part is getting the idea to a mature level so that it's easy to implement. This does involve having a plan on how to structure the classes for the engine and how graphics and logic can be kept seperated, etc. If the idea isn't matured, then you can't really implement it and the trasition might seem impossible.
As for the question itself, I'd bet quite a bit that you can find such a tutorial in some language on the internet and since the hard part is the planning and not the coding the general idea can easily get extracted and implemented with SFML.
If someone potentially would be willing & able to wrote such a thing, would you consider to pay him to some extended or should everything obviously happen  for free (i.e.  asking a half professional to write stuff over many many hours in his freetim for you for free)?

[FRex]

For example, a tutorial about the basic principles/implementation of an efficient tile engine. Tile engines are versatile, and are the core of many 2D games, yet there are no tutorials about how to create a vertex array based tile engine with SFML.

What is a tile engine exactly , no, seriously - everyone keeps throwing around 'something engine' and no one ever says what's the scope and features of one.
TBH I think more needed things are vertexarrays(important part of sfml but confusing) and box2d(people have problems? with it, apparently?) tutorials.

[Nexus]

What is a tile engine exactly , no, seriously - everyone keeps throwing around 'something engine' and no one ever says what's the scope and features of one.

Indeed, "engine" is so overused, it starts to get annoying.

What functionality would one include to a tilemap, in addition to a 2D container holding a sf::VertexArray?

[FRex]

What functionality would one include to a tilemap, in addition to a 2D container holding a sf::VertexArray?

Well, tilemap engine should include 2d container engine, culling engine, vertex array engine, texture engine, ect. 
But seriously just culling tiles out of veiw, loading and drawing.

I think handling collision would be a good implementation in the tile engine as well.

That's out of scope of sfml which means: outside library -> which, how, ect. or self cooked solutions -> bug prone, missing features, tunnelling issues, bad performance, not extendable ect.

[eXpl0it3r]

You say you're sure that I didn't mean it this way, and yet you imply that I did. I've even explicitly mentioned an example and explained it.

Well you didn't mean it, but your request still asks for it (i.e. just because it sounds different in your head, it doesn't have to change its meaning).

As I said, I'm quite familiar with it and am able to write apps and a simple game with an average code, however I'm not a professional, or probably not an advanced user. 

You won't really advance if you don't invest your time in reading and learning things, a tutorial will only be useful to some extend, but it won't help you really understand the principles so you'd be able to apply them on your own.
No offense, but I think about everyone that states he's familiar with C++ hasn't looked at it in depth. C++ is not just some for's and if's and classes, there's much more to it and the complexity is bigger than it might seem from the outside. If one claims to be a master in C++ then one also should be able to prove it.
E.g. there are hobby programmers I know that are working with C++ for around 20years and yet still get to learn new stuff, but they're at a level where they don't let others spend hours on writing code for them, but sit down and do their research on their own.

I'm not wrong for me, everyone is different, therefore works different. Someone may have trouble even with thinking of a solid idea for a game. No offense meant.

You didn't get my point here. At the state where you are, things might look easy to implement but the hard part seems to be getting the idea into code. Believe me I've been there, but once you get to a level where you've seen behind the curtains you get to know that ideas that seem so easy are in fact quite complex and notice that the implementation is just a small part of the way to the goal.

Since I've explained that people work differently, an example in another language isn't a good point. 

Why not? Since you claim to be quite familiar with C++ it should be easy to adapt some code from language X to C++ (this even excludes some esoteric stuff).

I don't even have the money to repair my computer, how do you think I could pay for something like this? You also seem to have missed where I said "and for other people like me," which means a public project to help people, just like the tutorials and wiki section of SFML. I don't think people get paid to write those, do they?

No I get what you meant, that the thing should be for the community and I never spoke out against this, but writing a complete platformer and document it to the extend that it could get used as a tutorial, is a job that can take many hours of freetime spread over several weeks and thus is quite a sacrifice to the person who does it. So if you want someone to spend so much time for you (and other readers) it would only be fair to pay him somehow. Free software is great but everyone has to life from something...

I think handling collision would be a good implementation in the tile engine as well.

There are many, many, many tutorials on who to handle collision and there are even tutorials in the wiki section. If you can't connect the dots then programming can get very rough...

[Nexus]

I think handling collision would be a good implementation in the tile engine as well.

This is exactly such a feature that would be very specific, and thus reduce the tilemap to very few use cases, limiting its interest in a tutorial.

Which collision detection and response is used depends highly on the game, and I don't think it's a good idea to implement collision algorithms in the tilemap. There will most likely also be other collisions (between player and enemies or projectiles, for example) and those may be strongly coupled to the game's physics. Even if a game-specific tilemap may carry some data concerning collision (like whether a tile is solid or not), collision functions should reside in a separate place, in my opinion.

[N_K]

Well, tilemap engine should include 2d container engine, culling engine, vertex array engine, texture engine, ect. 
But seriously just culling tiles out of veiw, loading and drawing.

...and there is not a single tutorial or example about this. All the tile loader/display systems I could find in this forum (apart from a seemingly abandoned and incomplete one) uses sprites to represent tiles, which later turned out to be a complete waste of resources, but no one seems to be aware of this.

And this is not something you can just figure out by looking at the documentation or the examples that comes with SFML, no matter how experienced C++ programmer you are.

[FRex]

And this is not something you can just figure out by looking at the documentation or the examples that comes with SFML, no matter how experienced C++ programmer you are.

I never realized sfml came with examples. I did figure it out myself with documentation, I asked one question 'how to texture vertex array' and I asked if what I'm thinking is the right way and it was.

I think I might write vertex array tutorial in next few days, but I don't promise anything. If you have special wishes you can send them to me.

[Laurent]

I think I might write vertex array tutorial in next few days

Don't forget that I'm still writing more official tutorials, so don't write a generic one about vertex arrays -- I'll do it soon.

[FRex]

How generic is too generic? Primitives, all array methods and single vertex explanation is too generic, probably, yes?

[Laurent]

How generic is too generic? Primitives, all array methods and single vertex explanation is too generic, probably, yes?

Yes.