Somebody's Forum Posts

  • You can fix this by manually adding a 1px transparent border to your images or extending the effect bounding box in the shader xml.

    Thanks for the input, Animmaniac, but my question is more about inconsistent behaviour - as you can see in the animated gif - one time you get the effect, move and object away, then back the same amount and the effect is different, move it away again, then back and it's suddenly fragmented. And my images are 254x254 so on export they get the obligatory 1px transparent border (I also just made this image have the border in preview and it's the same).

    Extending the bounding box for something like this usually makes things worse as then even more artefacts appear for overlapping objects (or you get unneeded elements on the other side). R0J0 observed it in his outline Shader (so he disabled bounding box extension) and I did in this one as well. Also, as said before for some reason adding any other Shader into the mix already sort-of extends the bounding box, even if it's not mentioned anywhere. If my inline Shader is the only one in the stack on a square that fills the texture it looks as it should - empty (since there's nothing to sample from the outside):

    If I use it as the only Shader it works predictably, every time. So, perhaps something is happening with Shader stacking - hopefully it can be addressed.

  • This is how "High quality" has to look like? This doesn't make any sense to me, can you please explain.

    It was exported as high quality Full screen and down scaling.

    This should have popped up when you picked "High quality":

    Guess you didn't follow the link.

  • Well, here's what I could gather so far:

    Chrome: Glitches

    Firefox: Glitches

    Opera: Glitches

    nw.js: Glitches

    Safari: Shaders didn't work

    IE11: Shaders didn't work

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • At first I thought it was just a minor update with the correct Y but then my irony detector told me to download, and look there, quite a difference! Nice graphic and effects! Did you make this just in hours?

    In about 20 minutes or so for the attached version Such is the beauty of StuffGEN (hohoho). I have been thinking of making a more "inclusive" demo that shows all sorts of effects in a single place, perhaps this will become it.

    It took a dozen Shaders, but seems like I'm finally close to making the one I really needed for StuffGEN, so soon the focus will shift. But still, more will come, sooner or later

    Edit: Attaching a slightly crazier version of the second version.

  • I don't know, can you reproduce it on other systems or browsers? It looks like the type of glitch which sometimes comes down to a driver quirk or some aspect of ANGLE (Chrome/Firefox's WebGL wrapper - IE11 uses a different engine)

    Thanks for the reply - so far I have tested on Chrome/Firefox on two different systems and the weird behaviour is present on both. Will try IE11.

    Since it uses the PixelWidht and PixelHeight values - is there a slim chance that those get iffy somewhere along the way?

  • Seems to work - but in a final version would it show a "proper" level like this or is the effect just for randomly filling a screen with tiles?

  • Awesome!! I just want to say that you should make the Y to negative value to make it more like Krakout.

    In your example, it scrolls in opposite direction for Y. (Bounce.capx) Not that it matters too much really.

    Oh, well, that's an oversight so here's a super-mildly improved version

  • Shameless bump in the hopes that Ashley might shed some light on why the results differ seemingly randomly...

  • Scirra should hire you Somebody <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile">

    High praise indeed, but I suspect a couple of simple Shaders wouldn't really make me worthy. Besides thanks to all the nagging I'm probably on some blacklist already <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy">

    Or maybe he is already "Somebody" within scirra.

    Sharing office with ROJO & Rex <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_wink.gif" alt=";-)" title="Wink">

    Oh the fun and joy <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":-)" title="Smile">

    Hehe, now those guys would deserve it.

    Haha! You all are fun. <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile"> But I agree Scirra should hire Somebody! <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy"> Not any somebody but Somebody. <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile">

    Request:

    I wonder if it is possible to add another scroll, more advanced scroll. Maybe name it scroll plus!

    Difference? Specify the angle of scroll of 360 degree. It would be so awesome. but if not, even diagonal would work too. I understand if this is much harder to code.

    But you already can do it with events! Using the seamless effect - just have two variables for X and Y and change them with events then pass onto the effect as parameters.

    Why? I thought of the game Krakout for C64, the background scroll in same direction as the ball is going (but slower rate). it is a breakout clone game.

    EDIT:

    I went to Youtube and looked at a video. Apparently it is just 8 directions. <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile">

    Subscribe to Construct videos now

    Watching that brought up memories of us kids playing that back in 80s on our C64 computers.

    Wow, that is some awesome music right there. And it would be really easy to do using the aforementioned Seamless effect <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile">

    Why not a built-in effect? In a Shader all the math is done for each pixel, so doing angle calculations and such would make it SLOOOOW, so passing pre-made values from events is a much better idea. And for this example it's also super-easy <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile">

    [attachment=0:ftag8t1v]Bounce.capx[/attachment:ftag8t1v]

  • Then something like this could work just fine - feel free to play around by placing more copies of the fuse sprite to make the fuse longer (hold Ctrl and drag them).

  • Depends a bit on how the effect is used in general - if it's like a static screen and this is a showcase effect you could just hand-place hundreds of fuse bits and then use for each ordered by zorder, for example to destroy them and set a spark sprite to their position.

    If this is a dynamic thing with spawnable bombs, for example, then things get trickier. Give a little more information on how you want to use this.

  • Seems like the approach to use would be to have the full text in there, already justified and then make separate characters visible. Otherwise it will jump as the amount of text changes, that seems inevitable.

  • Well, that is what I was implying - it is different because you are dealing with an object, not an image. An object that has an origin point that's freely editable - so your operations are based around that origin point.

    Say, you have a sprite that's like a turret: O==] - would you want it to snap to every edge or to the center of it, according to the origin point? C2 may have some interesting UI choices now and then, but I wouldn't call this one of them.

  • Or... if the user doesn't see that it snaps to the rather obvious center point after a snap or two, perhaps there's a bit of user error there as well.

    C2 is, after all, a game creation system, the rules are a bit different - if it behaved just like Photoshop, for example, when it comes to snapping it would quite likely be a nuisance.

  • Some quick and dirty ideas (since you have some anachronistic stuff in there...)

    [attachment=0:1d0n0p1r][/attachment:1d0n0p1r]

    The game's looking great, btw