megatronx's Forum Posts

  • megatronx yeah I'd have to do my own bench marks to make sure it'd be worth it. I've done a lot of the art myself in the game (and I'm not really an artist - not that I didn't put the hours in!).. so if I could make the game run considerably faster on slower machines I'd consider it, since I'd be forced to work with a real artist -- I don't have time to learn pixel-art style!

    I originally picked 1920x1080 not knowing anything really... I was working with an artist at the time and he was being snooty about HD graphics and I was like, okay, let's do HD. So now, 2 years later (and the artist is long gone) here I am.

    anyways just wondering if anyone on here went through the same decision making, of having to decide the best resolution for NW.js - it of course depends on the game, but performance is a genuine factor.

    For me it was a nightmare and took very long time to make decision of dropping hd assets and going with pixelart. But the longer that decision took, the more other things I did in construct and ultimately, in the end it was easier to go with pixelart. Pixelart is not that difficult.

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • I've made an observation long time ago, when looking at loading times and performance when using hd assets, that there might be an issue, and ultimately decided I'll go with pixelart, but with the idea that after completion of the game I'll redo those assets in hd, and see if game will still work well.

  • Ruskul

    x "making something you are proud of" to "making something that generates money".

    It was always like that, especially since free capitalism. However in the past people were better informed and educated in what is good and what isn't,and most of all, they were very active in going out and meeting with the "product". Nowadays it's whatever goes, and people I'd call connoisseurs are being attack and called snobs by uneducated with no developed taste, who are unfortunately in majority. And it looks to me, that when there is no proper understanding of what and why is good, and instead everything is good if someone says so, brought that overwhelming flood of mediocrity in all forms of art. Inspired art needs time to develop. And nowadays, especially due to technology,we have even less time to do stuff then before, since a lot of influential people thinks of machines as magic boxes that do everything by themselves and human is only there to click buttons. Less is more.

  • megatronx

    Here's another iteration that adds other units (moving and not) that can push each other around. They're all circles.

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/542 ... units.capx

    Tokinsom

    If you're interested the smooth motion around the corners is done by using voronoi region around the polygon. The light blue region is closest to an edge and dark blue to a corner. It then finds the distance and angle between the object and that point or edge of that region. With that it can calculate how far to move away if too close.

    Thanks! Will be very helpful.

    Tokinsom Yes, it should be included in all movement and solids behaviors.

  • Hi there, I have a question about array checking. If I remember correctly on xy plane it goes by column: x1 -y1,y2,y3, x2-y1y2y3 etc. But how does it check when z is included, because this gives me most trouble? How exactly those loops work? Thanks

  • Any free destroys economy. Free is deceptive as nothing is free. And most of all, any "free" costs you a work in the future.

  • megatronx

    Here's the capx changed in a different way. It still uses imagepoints, but as long as there is three or more, and the points define a convex shape it will work. For isometric you could position the points in a diamond shape.

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/542 ... _poly.capx

    Looks cool,thought it is much more complex then mine. How would you go about using this engine with several types of collisions:

    with walls that are not being pushed out

    with enemies that are pushed out

    with other object that can be pushed out, but differently by enemies and differently by the player

    I know it's a lot, and I have done all of those, but I'm curious how this would go with your engine.

  • Tokinsom megatronx and anyone else I linked here before.

    Update:

    Here's a more generic version of my above capx:

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/542 ... _plus.capx

    It no longer uses imagepoints, instead it calculates the corners regardless where the object's origin is. Also it's not tied to a particular sprite anymore, but you do have to duplicate an event or two to support more types (documented in capx).

    Thanks, looks interesting. I needed one for isometric game with rectangular polygons, so this is how I did mine a while ago, which pushes out, but is not making a nice smooth slide yet but it needs some smoothing out on pushing out:

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0jUjW ... sp=sharing

  • It picks the first instance (computers start counting at 0, so it may seem odd, but the 0th instance is the first).

    https://www.scirra.com/manual/124/system-conditions

    But is it first instance from two selected on A overlapping B?

  • Trigger once won't affect the Picking. Just use "Pick nth instance" with '0'.

    What does it do with 0?

  • Out of curiosity, could you share more details on its purpose?

  • Welcome back. GL with your project.

  • Something for plugin makers

    A lightweight JavaScript library for creating particles.

    https://github.com/VincentGarreau/particles.js/

    +10

  • I was wondering if you guys can add an other expression

    this would return the other instance of an event if there is one

    it would cut down code a ton and would be just plain simpler to use

    for example in a collision event you could make a damage function do

    accelerate towards angle (self.X, self.Y, other.X, other.Y)

    this way you only need to use one parameter for the knockback strength instead

    having to include 2 other parameters for the angle

    and keep in mind this would just be something I would do with it

    it could be a major short cut for everybody

    and would be extremely useful

    Solution is to make a family, which include all *other* objects, pick nearest *other* and do the angle()

  • megatronx Ah, bummer. Fortunately I only need it for the overworld (the game itself is a sidescroller) but if I were making a full top-down game I'd be wary of using a workaround...it's a very important feature if projectiles and enemies and such also use it.

    I actually manage to pull it off pretty well, just need to tighten it up when I get to early beta. Here's a list of collision checks in order:

    Player overlapping enemies

    Enemy overlapping Enemy

    Player overlapping pushable

    Enemy overlapping pushable

    Pushable overlapping walls

    Actors overlapping walls

    This way they rather don't clash with each other, and there is space to include projectiles and other collisions. Thought you can see collisions jagging a bit, but again, I hope that it is fixable. I also hope that later down the line I'll find a way to unify all under one event : Family A overlapping Family B. I went with that first, but couldn't find a way to diversify types of collisions; game is pseudo isometric, with angular walls, so pushing out has to be based on the rectangle and not on circle as R0j0 proposes.

    R0J0hound You use 'for each wall' in your event's. If I use families, do I also need to use for the loop, or family is threaten as all objects?