[quote:28su5mtk]Like that one time I argued with deadeye about how to make a grid movement, anyway nevermind that.

At first I was like "argued about what?" I had to actually look this up because I had no idea what you were talking about. Man, that was over a year ago!

Anyway, glad to hear you got this all sorted out

i was just kidding, making a self-referential joke. But I do have a habit of not getting it the first time though. anyway thanks again for the help. I appreciate it.

I figured it out. I was just being stupid and over complicating things, like I always do. Like that one time I argued with deadeye about how to make a grid movement, anyway nevermind that.

I decided to start over from scratch. After brainstorming and actually using my head, I figured out a way to do this in only 2 events, completely eliminating most (if not, all) the problems I had before.

So anyway here it is, my new and improved engine:

http://machriderx.googlepages.com/RPG3.cap

Works perfectly for me on 0.99.4

What version of Construct are you using?

The same version as you are.

What I am witnessing is very subtle, so perhaps I didn't describe it very well. Let me clarify.

Try moving left then press down and keep walking down. When you let go, the character faces the diagnonal, not down. This is not what I want.

This is frustrating me to no end. I thought I fixed it, yet I now have the same problem but in reverse!

Now the sprite keeps stopping at diagonals when I don't want it to.

Try this cap, hold the down key then try going right. It keeps going to the diagonal, even long after you stopped pressing down and are simply pressing right, or vice versa.

http://machriderx.googlepages.com/RPG2.cap

It must be a simple mistake I'm making, yet I can't figure it out at all.

It seems like tagging is completely broken. It doesn't matter which version of Construct I use, it just never works. I tagged my stopped animations as stopped and my walking animations as walking and it does nothing.

So, instead I set it so the events trigger the animations.

I finally managed to get everything running smoothly as possible with the correct animations playing and everything and now I've run into another problem.

When pressing diagonals (up/right, up/left, down/right, or down/left) the running animation plays fine, yet when it stops, it doesn't play the diagonal stopped animation.

Instead, it uses only the up, down, left, or right stopped animations.

I don't want to make it so the player can only face diagonals while moving as that will make combat really annoying (I might turn this into a Zelda-like engine).

Here is the cap file (uses the latest unstable build (by accident really, whoops)):

http://machriderx.googlepages.com/RPG.cap

As you can see, when you move diagonally, you can't really stop diagonally.

If anyone knows how to fix this, I would appreciate it.

Holy crap. I stol-- er.. borrowed my brother's 360 controller and tested this out. And wow!

This is like the space sim I was working on a long time ago (with the physics object) which I didn't finish due to lack of analog support. Except this uses its own movement.

Using the analog sticks to control the amount of thrust is amazing. It feels awesome to be able to control just how much force you put on the object.

I can't wait for DirectInput support though. That way I can use my own joystick and not have to borrow a 360 controller from my brother.

Yes, 360 controller support. Not quite DirectInput but good enough. Too bad I don't have a 360 controller to test it (I only have a normal ps2 style usb pad). I'm assuming there isn't a way to get it working with this.

It seems to support the analog functions too, if the compare event is any indication. I really wish I had a 360 controller handy to test it out though.

If I'm going to do 2D, I might as well do 2D and try to draw some sprites rather than half ass it by making it some kind of bastardization of 3D models rendered as sprites. I've never played Heart of Darkness but everything else I've played with prerendered graphics looks really bad to me now, so excuse me if that sounds a bit crass.

Either way, I just don't like the idea. If I wanted to make a game with 3D prerenders I would have easily done it by now. But I don't think it would look anywhere near as impressive as a game with actual real time 3D involved.

And again, to the developers. Don't worry about it. You've pretty much explained it all and I think I understand how hard it is.

Maybe if actual programming wasn't so hard for me to learn (I swear I've failed every programming class I've taken, it's not something I can do) I'd try to make my own 3D (or rather 2.5D) engine and wouldn't even need something like Construct.

Importing 3D models are sprites is fine if you're into that kind of thing. Personally though, I find prerendered sprites rather ugly.

I mean, they were the bees knees in 1994 with Donkey Kong Country but let's be honest here, it's not 1994 anymore. If you look at them now they look dated compared to 3D models that are actually rendered in real time.

And I apologize for not understanding the huge undertaking that 3D in general has been, even the 3D box which I had no idea was so complicated. If I knew how to code and could help out with this I really would. I guess it never occurs to me that even a simple idea can be very complex when it comes to actually coding it.

There's an existing issue of 2D art being difficult for many users. How would they cope with having to make full models for everything in their game, I wonder.

I actually find 2D a lot harder to do than 3D modeling. Even if you're not good at drawing, it's still possible for you to be good at 3D modeling.

Now if you're talking about high poly models meant for next-gen games, then you're right.

But why would Construct need high poly models in the first place?

In a 2.5D game, you could easily get away with using low poly models created in a tool such as Milkshape. Which by the way, are rather easy to make (see here for an example made in only 6 steps!).

I'd love to be able to use low poly animated 3D models in my 2D games someday. It would make things a hell of a lot easier and I'd be able to do some insane G-Gradius epic boss battle type stuff.

I really really hate drawing sprites. It's just something I absolutely cannot stand. I am just not able to visualize how things would look in 2D and just draw them like that. I like being able to rotate around and fix individual little details without having to go back and erase everything. Especially for animations. If you mess up a sprite animation, you have to go back and redraw entire frames of animation. Whereas in 3D, you can just fix it on the fly.

Plus rotating objects for things like huge battleships in shoot em up games are a bitch to animate. You hardly ever see objects rotate around their x-axis (roll axis) in 2D because it's such a pain to animate correctly. In 3D, however it's easy as simply rotating the model around.

Yeah, I agree with what's been said thus far. In my opinion, full 3D in Construct is not a very realistic goal.

However, being able to make "2.5D" games in Construct (or just 2D games with 3D models) would be good enough for me.

At the very least, I'd like to be able to use character models in my games instead of sprites. Especially for RTS games or games with a top down view, or maybe even for huge bosses (like a giant enemy airship that can rotate around and fill the screen with bullets) in 2D side scrolling games.

When Construct 9.4 arrives, there will be another version of the plugin made that will allow you to control built in behaviors, and add Xbox360 controller support

Will the Xbox 360 support include dual analog support?

I need it badly for a project I've been working on. I want to make a shoot em up with geometry wars style controls (one stick moves, the other aims and shoots).