tulamide: i tried also make it this way, it works, but it does not work well, sometimes if i click on button, nothing happens

You are absolutely right. The reason for this is a mistake I made. By comparing sprite('selector') with random(5), every single instance is compared to that function, so a new random number is generated per instance, which contradicts the original purpose.

The right code would involve another variable, e.g. a global var "myRandom"

+ Button: On Button clicked

-> System: Set global variable 'myRandom' to random(5)

++ Item: "selector" equal to random(5)

--> Item: Spawn object ...

where ++ Item:... is a subevent to + Button:

Sorry!

It is even possible to make it ignore interaction under all circumstances. Just set collision to none.

Another appoach:

Given you have 5 instances, create a pv for the object (e.g. "selector")

Give the pv the value 0 for the first instance, value 1 for the second, etc, up to the fifth instance, where "selector" gets the value 4

Then

+ Button: On Button clicked

++ Item: "selector" equal to random(5)

--> Item: Spawn object ...

Here you are :)

SaveFileDialog working

mediafire.com/file/9ttbatmbix01lm6/C1TilemakerV1.1b.cap

Thanks to those, who voted. I know it is very special, but nevertheless hard work.

Feels good to see it appreciated :]

Please have a look at the examples provided with the effect. Download those caps and investigate them.

The concept of Color Fusion (Masked) is just the other way round than you tried. Also, it clearly said, that it is a layer effect, you won't have much success using it as an object effect.

Start by reading the description in the Color Fusion (Masked) thread, then download both example caps and look how it is done.

<img src="smileys/smiley2.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

(two sides with the same length can still be right-angled)

Thank you so much! <img src="smileys/smiley20.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

Just tried it. It definitely evokes interest! It's one of those "hmm, I'll try just another coin. Right, enough. Ahh, just one more" type of games ;)

-Is the game too difficult?

I tend to say yes. But then again, I might just be too old for proper reaction times :P

-Is the resolution of the game too small? It's the first time I'm making anything that's not 640x480.

I don't think the resolution is too small. But you shouldn't let that bother you. I feel like this game will work in any size or resolution - as long as the levels are tuned to it.

-You opinion on the controls. Too sensitive? Too sluggish?

Too sensitive the closer you come to the ship. In about 60 pixels distance to the ship it feels comfortable.

-What about the graphics? It's not placeholder art, but if it looks really bad negative then I'll probably change it.

Don't change the style! It is clear, bright, with best contrast. The coins could benefit from a slightly darker color, and I think you could change the rocket to a paper plane (you are already blowing, so would fit), but all this within the current style.

If your goal is to tease the player a bit, then think about restricting the use of the "brakes". This is why:

I answered the first question by saying something about reaction times. In fact, I first had severe difficulties. Later, I just constantly pressed x and had a nice, slow-paced gaming experience :D

188� / 2 = a�

a = sqrt(188� / 2)

Would it be possible to get the older perlin noise plug still?

I just need some values, therefore I would prefer not to depend on an external library.

I tested the perlin noise plug some time and it fits my needs. Sadly, my computer broke a few weeks ago and I lost most of my data, including that plug.

I said it a year ago, and nothing I saw could change my opinion: There'S still nothing new to be seen here.

For example, the unlimited texture sizes of the Quake engine, that's something new.

But voxels (however you call them, voxel, atom, sphere, ...) aren't new. The technology exists since at least 20 or so years, there were even games made based on that tech.

The only thing that changed is that there is a market crier now, trying to be the loudest in the hope to make the people forget, that they are selling the same old wine in new wineskins.

They profit from technology progress in other fields of computer graphics, that's all. Their example would have been the same 20 years ago, just with 2 fps instead of 20, and a smaller viewfield because of smaller displays of that time.

It doesn't work better because they reinvented the wheel, but because computers calculate faster nowadays.

Besides, the real breakthrough would have been a convincing fast character animation algorithm reacting to physics. I wait, until Euclideon presents this, and then I say: "Wow, they really made a huge step for the whole industry."

For now, they just present another of the many early stage voxel engines with mostly no use for a game.