lucid's Recent Forum Activity

  • updated with slightly higher magnification rate

    makes it easier to see the wraparoundness of it

    http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1013446/reflector.cap

  • you have a big sprite with the lives left and the box around the item and everything called tablo

    don't make that over and over

    just have the whole thing as one sprite

    and have the tiny number be many sprites

    just that one thing is wasting alot of vram

  • here's the method with the magnify pixel shader

    I have alot of shady stuff going on here, so let me know if it runs like crap

    http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1013446/reflector.cap

    hey deadeye, I can't load yours because I don't have overlay proper

  • i'm at work now, and i'm going to be pretty busy today when i get home, so i wont be able to take a crack at it til sunday probably, but this can be done. using resizing canvases alone or with lens shader and canvases

  • no tutorial on hinges specifically.

    pretty simple stuff

    heres a quick tutorial

    start a new cap

    make 2 sprites

    put physics behavior on both

    make sprite1 immovable(on the properties for the physics behavior)

    put sprite1 in the center of the layout

    put sprite2 to the right of it, and leave a decent space between

    in your event sheet, make one event

    start-of-layout

    then add one action. sprite2, under physics tab

    create hinge to sprite1

    run the cap

    you'll get the idea

    if you do a hinge in both directions the hinges fuse the two objects together and no longer rotate like hinges

  • well

    the project is pretty big

    there's no way to find exactly when it started crashing

    one thing I will say though

    that tablo variable that changes the whole hud every time they lose a life is a waste of VRAM

    you should keep the whole thing the same except for the number

  • thanks ash

  • yes, if you need the hinge to not be a hinge that moves, but just they get stuck together

    hinge object a with object b
then 
hinge object b with objecta[/code:3q3avccv]
this will make them stuck together like one big object

if you're really intent on it looking crazy, you could add something graphical that happens to make them gel, either a distort map thing, or an in between sprite there just to make the gel area look just right, 
but yeah hinges connect,

  • well I guess I forgot to request my feature

    I think you should be able to get peak level for each channel playing

    it could be very useful, and not just in music games

    characters could lip sync to the loudness of their voice

    you could have an accurate measurement of how loud something is

    if you wanted a model for when a npc should hear something

    of course with music games it opens up alot more interesting and intricate possibilities

    is the separate channel thing something difficult to implement?

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • I didn't realize until trying to respond to a help post that when you get peak level per channel, it means left and right channel, and not the channel you loaded it to.

    I thought you could load 10 different things into 10 different channels, and get the peak for each to do crazy cool synchronizations of sprites with different music parts, or robots with light that light up according to the sounds they're making. instead it's left channel and right channel

    I understand channel means both of these things in many arenas, but we should also have some way of clarifying it, since you can mute channel 2 meaning the channel you loaded into the second slot whether it's playing out of the left or right side, and you can get peak level for channel 2 that includes anything playing out of the right side regardless of what channel you loaded it into. can be a little confusing

  • It always amazes me how programmers reply to reasonable questions like the ones I have posed.

    no one's reacting any way. you stated your case, and we disagreed

    [quote:2vk7gjd3]

    What can you call a thing other than "variable" that is more descriptive and more readily understandable to non-initiates? I'm sure you can find a better word or phrase if you cared to think about it for longer than a second or two. I know I can. For non-global variables, instead of a dead and indeterminate noun, why not use a verb like "remember". "Remember"(something) would hold whatever you wanted in its "memory" until it is replaced by something else. A global variable could be equally descriptive by using another active phrase that everyone can understand like "remember forever" (something). This is how we speak and this is how we think.

    you can't call a noun a verb, because you are describing a thing not an action

    that would be like calling a car, a drive

    a variable is something remembered, not the action of remembering

    I want to remember the health left for a character

    so I make a variable called "health"

    from now on "health"=10 makes health equal 10,

    to me that's easier than remember 10 for health

    I can't just say "remember 10",

    because I want to be able to have many variables that I can keep separate and manipulate in whatever way I'd like , for instance, 

    if "health" is less than 10 [/code:2vk7gjd3](also the way you say that in construct), and [code:2vk7gjd3]character "lives left" = true[/code:2vk7gjd3], then do so and so
imagine if we're saying remember.  it would only be annoying

[code:2vk7gjd3]recall memory of health, and if less than 10, recall memory of lives left, and if that's true, then do so and so[/code:2vk7gjd3]
and you can't call it a memory, because memory already has a meaning in computers and programming

"remember forever" is also misleading.  a global variable can remember something for less than a 60th of a second if so needed, the amount of time has nothing to do with it.  it's the fact that variable can be used globally that makes it global. "globally" meaning throughout every part of the program.  we could call "all around variable", "always ready memory" and it's still going to need explanation. 

[quote:2vk7gjd3]
Considering that something is "advanced" or "professional", simply because it is obscure is nonsense.

first of all, it's not obscure.  you're like a kid walking into french class, saying the teacher sucks because you can't understand what anyone's saying yet.
it's not written in plain english because no one has invented Synthetic Intelligence yet and it's impossible to do that.  besides, if you want to create something reasonably complex, meeting the computer halfway makes it easier to describe your problem.  
[code:2vk7gjd3]I want the x coordinate of my character calculated by interpolating the values of the x coordinate remembered from the last checkpoint he touched, and the x coordinate of the enemy he just clicked on, and I want it to be closer to the enemy based on the amount of power we remember he has left in his magic pouch.[/code:2vk7gjd3]
this is not a complex problem, however it is arbitrary, it's something I might want in my game, that no one will ever need in their game again.  there can't be a little button with an icon on it that describes that.  it's a math problem, based on parameters that are decided by the game creator
in construct that would be something like
[code:2vk7gjd3]character.x=lerp(lastcheckpoint.x,enemyclicked.x,powerleft/fullpower)[/code:2vk7gjd3]
now of course you have to first learn that something.x, tells you the x coordinate.
you have to know or care what linear interpolation is,  which is just the mathematical way to solve the problem, and then you have to look in the wiki to find out that LERP means linear interpolation...i'd prefer to look that up once than to type in linear interpolate every time, btw. photoshop doesn't involve complex problems of logic,  it's just visuals, of course it can be visually intuitive.  you can't just draw logic to a screen, or actually you can,  and construct does it quite nicely. 
[quote:2vk7gjd3]
It is quite alright that you have designed this engine for making professional quality 2D games, but that does not require you to make it difficult for non-professionals to do so.  Games and game logic are incredibly simple if you care to be honest about it.  There is no need to add layers of complexity just so those who consider themselves "professionals" don't feel let down.

games and game logic are as simple or as complex as you'd like them to be, if I want to be able to able to move character1 to object2
[code:2vk7gjd3]"position character1 to object2" [/code:2vk7gjd3][i]<---this is how you tell construct to do this[/i]
seems pretty simple and self-explanatory to me,  however, if you wanted to make a game that calculates the most realistic animations for the legs of a fully customizable creature so that no matter how weird you make it, it still moves in a way that makes sense(like spore, for instance).  I challenge you to describe that solution in simple terms.  and yes, things like that are possible in construct
there are no additional layers of complexity.  there are layers of complexity removed for you actually, the behaviors in construct take care of a ridiculous amount of logic for you.  it sounds like you're not interested in making games, you're interested in someone making them for you,  which is what a game designer does, not a game developer.  I think construct takes as many layers out of the middle of that as possible.  I can think of a complex problem, and have a working model in minutes with construct.  something totally unheard of in any other platform with this level of power. 
 It really can't get much simpler than this without sacrificing ridiculous amounts of power and making it an RPG Maker or something, where you're not making your own game, you're just plugging your characters and story into a premade game.  you can make any type of 2d game or app with construct.  mario, legend of zelda, lemmings, tetris, paintshop, world of goo, braid, a calculator.   of course with this amount of flexibility you're going to need to learn the tool, instead of just clicking around
actually, after reading through the basic tutorials, and asking a few questions, I learned quite a bit by clicking around,  but you get my point.  this is not the little big planet level editor.  the little big planet level editor is fun and awesome and you can do amazing things with it,  but you couldn't make a little big planet level editor with it.  with construct you have the ability to create anything, that additional power comes with additional things to learn and get used to

[quote:2vk7gjd3]
Actually, PhotoShop was one of those programs I learned to use quite proficiently by clicking around and not reading a single page of documentation or following a single tutorial.  Any really professional application that claims to have even a fraction of PhotoShop's utility should provide the same facility.

that's a silly comparison,  that's like me saying that because I can sit down and a drafter's table and draw something, but I can't sit down in a mechanic's shop, and fix a car, that the tools at the shop are poorly designed.  photoshop is used for making [i]visuals[/i]. you're looking at the screen.  it's an analogue to a piece of paper.  There's all kinds of functionality in photoshop you can't learn to use correctly by "clicking around".  
you can't just draw logic on the screen. 
[quote:2vk7gjd3]
Oh yes . . . Deadeye - that avatar of yours speaks volumes, you know.

that's mature

[quote:2vk7gjd3]'Good programming makes simple things simple, and complex things possible' (Alan Kay, more or less).

if you're going to quote computer scientists, you should quote them in context.  he's discussing the way you write programs, not the languages you're writing them in.  object oriented design is a way to design programs so that it's easy to break down things into manageable chunks of information and logic, so as your program grows, it's easy to conceptualize what you are doing, and btw
just curious, what looks simpler, construct? , or alan kay's current project ?:
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Edit_Source_Code.jpeg[/url]

[quote:2vk7gjd3]� Programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute. � - (Abelson / Sussman)

abelson is a little closer to the mark, but I think construct exemplifies this concept to the fullest, construct makes it completely simple to see what I'm doing.  I can see
[code:2vk7gjd3] in the event Bullet Collides with Guy1,[/code:2vk7gjd3] this list of things should happen to both of them.   
anything unreadable about someone's construct software is a result of poor planning, or poor documentation within their program (comments and such)

[quote:2vk7gjd3]One of these days the Priesthood of the code will be thoroughly disbanded.  Mark my words.

Psmith

so basically, you're annoyed with automobile engineers with their well designed CAD software, because you couldn't pick it up and design a ferrari by clicking around?

  • yes, construct uses some programming terms for things, but to try to abstract it into something else would be more confusing.

    take variables

    what do you call something that you can use to store any value in any form you can think of?

    want to remember a sentence someone typed in, need to remember the name of something, need to remember the x coordinate of something, need to remember the angle of something? need to remember a value that represents a characters emotional state? need to remember the value you're plugging into an equation? a player's score? the 3rd item in someone's inventory?

    what are you going to call something that can do all these things?

    I think variable is as good a word as any, and even if we called it box, or memory cell, the concept would still need to be explained to a lay person. Don't be intimidated by words. if you want to do away with variables altogether, you're going to severely limit the power of your software, if not, it's the best word, because as caspis said, you're going to alienate people who enjoy programming already.

    variables are just one example. functions is another one. functions do something. that something can be a complex math equation, renaming a character, resetting the game, putting some objects in order. anything you can program, you can make a function...it's a shortcut in a sense.

    like if we had a function called "get ready for school"

    get up,

    eat breakfast,

    brush teeth,

    get dressed,

    comb hair,

    get bookbag

    but we just explain that once and from now on we just tell construct to "get ready for school"

    you don't have to work those things out over and over again. it's useful, it's powerful, it's necessary in any powerful language. what would we call it? a tasklist? it's still the same thing no matter what it's called, and other than the first second where you say "ok, so what's a tasklist?", instead of "ok, so what's a function?", there's really no difference

    also, you'd be surprised by how much you can do without variables, functions, z-orders, exclusion, etc, anyway.

    one more example, this one is a simpler concept

    z-order is what's in front of what

    so if the tree and the guy are at the same spot, which one should be in front, and which one should be obscured by it? what's the order of all the objects?

    what should we call z-order, front-to-backness? I can't think of a word that will explain that sentence to someone. and as before, now you understand z-order, so it doesn't matter that it was called that.

    don't allow yourself to be intimidated by a few new words, you might be surprised by how easy things are in construct. also, kodu, is not nearly as flexible as construct. Other than the 3d aspect, you could create a program like kodu in construct. kodu is legos, construct is a factory. construct is a real development tool. kodu is like a fun toy that let's you play around with some programming concepts. know what I mean? it's like the difference between MTV music maker for playstation, and FL Studio, or the difference between sony eyetoy movie editor and adobe premiere.

    those other things are fun, and let you be a little creative, but they aren't serious tools.

lucid's avatar

lucid

Member since 16 Jan, 2009

Twitter
lucid has 22 followers

Connect with lucid

Trophy Case

  • 15-Year Club
  • Entrepreneur Sold something in the asset store
  • Forum Contributor Made 100 posts in the forums
  • Forum Patron Made 500 posts in the forums
  • Forum Hero Made 1,000 posts in the forums
  • Coach One of your tutorials has over 1,000 readers
  • RTFM Read the fabulous manual
  • Email Verified

Progress

22/44
How to earn trophies