"I uploaded the wrong cap file D:"

ha nice :)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

if your going the rout of manual picking, the key is for each loops,if you hit a road block,just keep playing around with those.

and when your trying to find a object with the uid as a value, make sure you use:

( the object with the value of the UID)= picker

( the object that the UID belongs to)= object

for each picker:

      -object UID = picker value ,UID'

if you do it the other way:

For each object

     -picker value 'UID' = object UID

It won't work unless you also For each the pickers

and that's 2X as slow to process.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Some other methods that are useful. In particular for picking the same kind of object as the one doing the picking:

_______________

Using functions:

add the .x and .y of an object as a parameter

call a function forgetting objects

on function:

set other objects value 'target x' and 'target y' to parameter .x and .y

______________

Using arrays:

set each object value 'AX' and 'AY' to a unique position in an array.

and do all your comparisons based of the array positions, not the objects themselves.

---------------------------------------------------------------------       

like i said, these are only really necessary for picking the same object. i know that's not what your doing right now, but it think everybody at some point gets headaches over this problem.

HTML5 may very well be the future. I bet in the future it will run crazy fast. And in the future some of the simple things that can be so complicated now, wont be so complicated.

So in the future, I'll use HTMl5.

when your things work in spite of the system, instead of because of the system, maybe its better to have a better system.

....apparently I'm feeling poetic today.

when objects are in a container they don't need to be spawned, just spawning the 1 object that the other is linked too will create the seconded object.

further more, since the objects are in a container, construct already assumes you want that object whenever the first object is in the event.

so to fix:

you only need 1 event,

#3: always set sprite 5 x.y. to player x.y.

that's it...

delete the rest. (except 1 & 2 )

and don't worry about creating a sprite 5 for each player in the editor, it automatically dose that for you.

VonBednar

I think CC is a wonderful tool for most things,and can teach you a lot, trust me,before construct, i didn't even know what an array was.

My point of the "sinking ship, without it's captain" warning, is that nobody is doing any work on the project. and it desperately needs some.

so if your using it, be aware that there may be some holes you cant fix, and nobody's coming along to help.

If your fine with that, that's great. but go into it with both eyes open.

------------------------------------------------------------------

I actually kinda got a team with my brother, he always said he would help me make games if i ever stopped using game-makers.

And I imagine most indie developers build an engine using scattered pieces of other engines. its just a process with more control on the foundation, witch is what i need to achieve what i want.

(for my specific case, its how it handles checking all sprites, even if they do nothing, this is a huge problem for rendering tile maps, and is such a key part to how construct works, i doubt its a simple plugin to fix.)

Hell, maybe i'll learn python, come back, and patch up the holes in construct that are crippling my games.or jump on the resurrection project.

like i said, i love the thing. so who knows.

"or whatever to fits what I need." I guess is the catch.

I'm doing so much now in 3d its stupid, im creating normal maps using distorted sprites to make lighting maps and 3d physics. at some point, i should probably just use unity3d. witch uses javascript among other languages.

but I've been told several times, code language is simple, its every thing else that's hard.

and right now I'm doing almost everything using arrays, loops, and convoluted functions.

my collisions,objects,variables, path-finding, height maps, are all in arrays.

and that's awesome that i can do that with CC. and something i just dont think C2 will be able to handle for quite some time.

But It's terribly inefficient, and a lot harder than it needs to be.

I'm basically building an engine inside an engine... and that's kinda dumb...

..or not.. I really don't know, kinda what i'm hoping to find out on my programming pilgrimage.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

actually, ill just send you a PM with one of my current projects to give you an idea.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

QuaziGNRLnose

Ashley : "The way things are going, eventually these forums will fall silent and we'll probably see fit to discontinue Classic completely. We're not doing that now, because it's virtually zero work to leave these forums running and people still use them. But I think it's inevitable."

maybe the boats not sinking, but the captain jumped ship a long time ago.

Master game idea is:

Escape Velocity/ NAEV stile Meta world game

but set on "floating islands" with plains, and airships

witch you fly with a z. axes along with an x. and y.

inside each ship is crewed by an 16 bit pixle art crew, moving around custom made rooms, living and working, like the Sims crossed with FTL.

on the island you can land,and walk around, or build a base of operations. witch this crew could move between,pathfind in both the ships array, and the worlds array. then you can dive down into the under city to scavange for artifacts.

and its all done with just the mouse.

i made a post over on the general forum Pic thread with some of my concept art about it.

I know that sounds lofty, it is. but I have a lot of experience making and failing to make games. so i have a good understanding of what is/ is not possible.

and i seriously think i can make this.

it just requires an absurd amount of planing and effort.

I've had it in the back of my mind for a long time, and almost all my games have worked one way or another towards this idea.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Experience wise 10 years (5 with MMF, 5 with CC) I'm 25.

I've always considered myself an artist, not a programmer. but if i wanted to see my game ideas become reality, i needed to make them myself.

But because of that fear of not being able to program. i always used game making programs. however, over the course of using construct I've gained a lot of confidence in my ability's. and I'm not afraid anymore, I know whatever difficulty I encounter, I'll overcome it.

my plan is to go with javascript. the idea being if its just not what I want, I can come back to C2 or something, but with an ability to code the back-end with plugins or whatever to fits what I need.

I have an older brother that i work with on web design who has a masters in computer science who just gives me hell for wasting my time with Gamemakers.

I always have argued against him, saying I can get to were I want too go with these programs. I still kinda believe that.

I know the traditional rout can be hard. and in the end maybe too time consuming to effectively make games from scratch.

but I need to see for myself.

For me its a mater of ...well...now what do i do?

Over the years I've systematically broke down all the large hurtles using CC for my mega game project. and am now ready for the difficult process of putting them all together.

But CC is so unstable on large projects, and is doomed to obscurity as far as the devs are concerned.

Its just a bad idea for me to attempt my mega project with it.

and C2, and HTML5, just seem a LONG ways from being were I need it to be.

so it's out of the picture.

...so I guess I need to start looking else were.

but I think i'm done with gamemakers, I've spent the last 5 years using one, waiting on the day it would be version 1.0, I still have a list of things that have "wait for V 1.0" on them. that day never came, and never will.

so fool me once and all that..

That's not a jab at the construct dev team. they were making it for free.

an they still managed to make the best darn game-maker I've ever seen.

but putting my faith in others systems just seems like a bad idea.

I think I'll just start strait coding my projects, its going to be hard to start all over again. but at least code never really goes obsolete.

But first I got some projects I'd like to let people see. and they need a bit more work. so I'm here till that's done.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

To all the newer people on CC:

CC can do amazing things, and can teach you a lot.

But never forget. Your on a sinking ship.

A deep heart-felt thank you for all the help over the years. and best wishes on your future pursuits, and health.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

In total honesty I've been struggling with the same issues as far as construct is concerned.

Looks like I'm fallowing your lead.

I'll probably be leaving soon for similar reasons, just got to finish packing my things.

just add the tank head, and the detector, to the tank body container.

its an option under groups in the property panel.

it basically makes objects linked to each other

its extremely useful.

Ok? Were doing this? alright then...

:WARNING INCOMING NERD TANGENT:

I'm sorry C2 just doesn't feel right. like I said, I used it, its got some cool stuff going, i really love the interface, in particular how in handles global values and arrays.

however it really doesn't seem like it was ever intended to support projects heavily reliant on client side resources or processor speed.

you CAN make them, but its really inconvenient.

and a lot of the more advance features you would have to do thru custom plugins.

witch you would have to wright in JavaScript.

making it not much of a game maker, more of a game engine at that point.

the default system seems to be designed for small browser stile games

--------------------

Conversely Construct has surprised me over and over with what I can get away with just inside the vanilla program. I really do love the thing.

I've been using it heavily for over 5 years now. and there's seriously never been an idea I have gone to it with, and the thing not be able to handle.

However when I've tried to put it all together. something stupid happens., and the whole thing becomes a mess of offset icons and random syntax errors. you can still cross the finish line, nothing is ever critically wrong with it, but the interface at that point is not very easy to use.

I would love to see a REAL sequel to construct.

and maybe C2 really is that. its just never felt like it.

Maybe its just that the cutesy ,Comic Sans , "Were so Wacky", baby's first game-maker, web site overhaul just left a bad taste in my mouth.

C1 was created as a counter product to clickteams MMF. with the attitude of creating a game making program as a legitimate rival to strait code scripting.

the whole thing felt like you were on the cutting edge of some unknown tool that was going to revolutionise how games could be made.I really beveled that. I even donated to the project...witch is a big deal for me.

Now every time I go to the site I just go "Good God...what am i doing with my life?"

as if I've dedicated the last 5 years to trying to become the

... instead of learning a REAL instrument.

Fixed it

the other file dialog conditions are saving the array before it can load

just come up with beter conditions in event 42/44/46

not leftclick on "nacti" or "uloz"

maby have a global value change to say if your saving or loading.

left click on "nacti" set global(saveload) to 1

left click on "uloz" set global(saveload) to 0

global (saveload)=1

file dialog ok

                  >save

global (saveload)=0

file dialog ok

                      >load

hey crowtongue did you actually get the array to load? I went thru his code and did that, but the array still wont load.

you actually don't even need the clear array action, loading an array loads over everything.