megatronx's Forum Posts

  • In regards to advanced memory management and multi-core threading, I think it would be cool, but first the basics need to be nailed down.

  • Another example of what I've been talking about. Just doing shmup with my mate.Game is on layout the size of single screen, and enemies fly trough it, but there no way of bouncing off bullets of the borders of the layout (set to unbound scrolling), and adding solids to compensate is impossible, due to the enemies needing to fly trough the screen. Those little things matter. And no one is saying to not use events. But mixing plugns and events creates a lot of mixed resoults, as sometimes they just not compatible. Plugins need to be more feature proof and also work better.

    eli0s additional option in pathfinding to avoid selected units / integration with physics!

  • I was thinking about a force-based rts movement thing the other day. This is how I'd do it, & I'm sure it could efficiently handle movement, collision & pathing for hundreds of units:

    If you could pull it off and share, that would be neat. Otherwise, have no clue how to implement it.

    I have one more idea: maybe having a single sprite with pathfinding, to which position object with physics is always positioned. Then other selected units joint to that main one, or in chain, one after the other. Or groups within selected group.

  • Prominent

    Ah, that does make sense. I forgot about that.

    megatronx

    Doesn't Prominent's idea work?

    I'll check now. But even if it does, I have no clue how I could apply this to many units. Any suggestions?

    I'm thinking of such idea: out of selected units having only first unit pathfind, and the others are following either it or create a chain. How this could be done?

    edit@ R0J0hound The Prominent example doesn't seam to work https://www.dropbox.com/s/9286l0hy9pp9etk/tst.capx?dl=0

  • What really needs to be discussed is how to better implement the plug system.

    As is, third party developers shy away from sticking around for a few different reasons, backwards compatibility, no support, etc.

    Then those that do attempt to try to make plugs wind up using existing libs rather than implement their own mechanics. That is something else that could be talked about more often.

    Regular users need more plugs, and plug developers need more support, enough said.

    I was also thinking about something like build n plugin editor, where you can build your own plugins with events.

    — I would like more functionality n those plugins, more versatile options. And speaking of pathfning, having units avoid each other is such a small but significant addition. And it's been done already in early dos days, i don't see a reason why it would be so difficult have now. But pathfinding is just a tip of the iceberg. There is way too much fiddling round with the mundane, and there is no need for simple things to be made so complex, that they need a lot of events to be made, as I've explained in op. x

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • shinkan many of the things in the event system go back to CC and even earlier to gf.

    I'm also talking about stuff that we all would benefit from like plugins for in game ui/menu that can be extended if needed trough events, more collision options including those that would work together with pathfinding between units and option for units to avoid each other. Simpler paring of same types of objects. More input actions, like possibility to cancel input at any point. Adding pathfinding to platform games. Basically expanding wherever it can be expanded by taking under consideration different game scenarios. As nimos100 says, adding details, streamlining where it is possible by having chained actions and conditions on top of new functionalities. etc

  • Hi,

    I've never really had a vibe to learn programming (even thought I did in the end learn some js/jquery and php because of work ), so the premise of none-programming game making software was always appealing to me. First there was an obscure gamemaker on atari st, then click and play on pc, followed by rpg maker and then games factory. I started when I was 7 years old. Then my friend showed me construct - back then alpha 0.18 with that pseudo top-down gta demo - and I've been learning and using it, and observing its development ever since. It always had and still has marvelous potential.

    However I was never fully satisfied with it and never felt like it is delivering on its premise. I always waited for improvements hoping that certain things that I couldn't pull off now, will be made available at some point, and that technical issues will be resolver. The latter I'll leave for some other time.

    At this moment, I'm certainly finding construct limiting, both creatively and productively. There always has been some obstacle getting in the way of realizing the vision. And then there is always a talk of walk around's to compensate of lack of many standards. Stuff like units pushing out of object, to be used in games like rts or hack and slash etc. Or input delays to simulate different action rates. Or even such simple thing like scrolling text and default menu plugins, resolution change etc. Many ui and level building improvements. Those need to be within the vanilla software from the start. Thought many things can be done trough events, they need incredible attention, most often feeling more like hacks and rarely ending up working precisely, tightly in action, making often game feel and look awkward. In the event style environment, behaviors, plugins be doing most of work, streamlined but with many options, ready to take on many different ideas, and taking care of mundane, but giving a lot of possibilities. Same goes for UI and level tools. This will free up time needed for development in other, more important areas of gameplay; areas that will make or break the success of the game. I'm talking about original ideas and fine-tuning, testing and experimenting.

    So now c3 is on its way and I hope that this time around it will be made truly with the developer in mind.

    Thanks for reading

  • R0J0hound Ive checked your demo, but I can see it not working that tight in rts game :< Could I ask you for help again, to make a demo of rts movement with physics? Thx

  • I don't have a comparision, thought I see the difference with my own eyes. But if I remember correctly Jayjay was the one who has made an example with dots.

  • My capx will keep the enemies from piling up. If they are piled up they will spread out very quickly. The only drawback is they can be pushed into the walls a bit if things are crowded.

    Prominent's solution is to basically have a second object attached to the object with the pathfinder behavior. That bypasses the pathfinder overriding the physics positions, and probably is the best way to Incorporate physics. The rest is to stop the velocity of the objects so all we get is the pushing action. I'm unsure of the purpose of the force though.

    Would you be able to make example with physics for me? I'd highly appreaciate it!

  • >

    > But it isn't, evidently, as you already mention. HTML5 games just doesn't cut it (yet?) when it comes to a "smooth" experience, native exporters feel more "snappy" and responsive.

    >

    Only for a few of the broken Chromium versions. NW 10.5 is very smooth and snappy.

    Did you guys hear about 2K Games's Bioshock on iOS? It was removed. The recent iOS update broke the game. O_o

    So it's not just us little guys that get screwed over for problems created by Apple or Google.

    10.5 was still not as smooth as cc.

  • megatronx , Jayjay , perhaps because they use different technologies? Cc uses directX9 and C2 HTML5.

    Well, webGL trough html5 canvas, and that should work just as smooth.

  • megatronx I'm insanely glad I'm not the only one to notice that

    Cool. I noticed that from the start too, and I hope more people see that.

  • I still don't understand why construct classic projets display smoother then c2. I think that should be something taken care of in c3.

  • You can attach the physics object to another physics object via a joint, and move one like so:

    also make sure the objects don't collide with each other.

    Then you would just move the object that needs to follow a path, and the physics object attached will get pulled.

    edit: the 10*sprite2.mass stuff should be 100 instead of 10.

    Thx. Willlook in to it.

    I was searching around and didn't you ask this before in a way?

    Anyway can't this problem be simplified further?

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

    Use a family to be able to pick two different instances and then just compare the distances between the two and then move them apart with the "move at angle" action if they're too close?

    Hi,

    Thx for example. Will examine it. But I have concern that it wont work well, if its based of example from example rts project. The issue in rts example is that pushingout is easy to glitch out,with just few clicks the units end up on topof each other. But will examine.

    Still I'm interested to see ho it would workwith physics. Bouncing out would be desirable too.