i like it but, i dunno, the controls suck. like really badly, also, u should replace those hanging cubes with 3d boxes i think itll look way cool like that

nice but useless, it takes way too much power, and it seems hard to contain for a true effect

yah, i got it to work like that too after adding a a value to the picked lock-on, which makes it work fine with lots of instances, except there should only be 1-2 attached objects on each circle or it goes all wierd

just boosting this back up since none read replied yet and its a major issue for me

Yes, as you would expect the distance() expression uses the Pythagoras theorum as you have written. I'm sure it's working correctly, and it just returns the distance between two points - which is always positive and is unrelated to quadrants. I've used it for several things now and it works fine as far as I know!

i dunno why but i tested it using a text(s) as a counter, and i put one text to distance(blalblabla)

and the other too the pytho but got different results?

in a game I'm working on, I have essentially a light that is fading in really fast then fading out slowly. To get it to stay, I assigned it's position to always be on another object, and when it fades out all the way, spawn a new object right where it was. Works like a charm.

well i have a light exactly like that and all it does is fade out slowly using set opactiy-1 till it reaches 0 and fades in quickly using opacity+10 till it gets to 100 both activated by a value if 1 fade out if 2 fade in, it looks perfect.

one thing i really hate about making 3d games, is you cant be a one man band, its just too time consuming, 2d games allow a game maker to lay down what they want get it too work, and wont take 20 yrs to look finished (texturing is a pain in the arse)

also i dont know if some1s said this yet, but triggers are events! events are real powerful but most ppl forget that there order matters, and that causes problems. dont think of construct as a box, you can make any game you want and aren't limited by the program, even when you get into complex things you'll realise their easily adapted with a bit of thought (although this isnt good for my school work because now i think of everything as events )

and avi would suck for a ingame objects, it looses quality and looks washed out. reneder your looping textures as a set of BMPs or PNGs, theyll look nicer that way (if they are based off a 3d model, if its a vid you got off the internet dont use it at all).

[quote:jxwk366c]try some 4000 year old mathematician lol

lol, thats all i have to say

and a trig 101 would be useful to us who learn faster than the schools can teach us

im amazed i thought of such things! i would of been inventing the wheel in my own way !

wow, i just realised ive understood trig all along, i just need a 101 page

is distance doing this? or something different entirely

sqrt(((A.x-B.x)^2)+((A.y-B.y)^2))

cause its returning numbers based on quadrants, does it return actual distance?, or does it return the translation amount?

i believe that uses quadratic functions? theres an article somewhere on the forums

yah i guess so, im just posting this as i said for anyone who doesnt know, cause i know i didnt before i downloaded a game which had it with it.

and analog support would be awesome, but if they were to add it it should be a bit more user friendly than mmf2s plugin, and should support xbox 360 controllers well most programs cant recognise the analog triggers, and they also read the triggers as one single axis, when its actually 2

what i mean here is i want an object to move in the direction of a given angle, using coordinate translations, for a custom movement, now i have been developing something similar to this but i havnt gotten everything, its basically a formula which you input an angle and it returns to you scaled values so it will still move 1pxl per second, but in the angle of the given angle, meaning 45 would return to you something like 0.7y 0.7x understand (seperately of course)? then you scale your value according to those given numbers by multiplying them by it.

i was just wondering if this existed already, because i made this all by myself but im sure some 1700's mathematician has already done it lol. so is there a way?