If you walk into a slope that hits against a wall, then turn around and jump, it won't jump. When you click the arrow key, he moves forward a little bit into the air and falls. It's really...strange.

Note: This is using Auto Mirror. Without Auto Mirror, it doesn't happen. Perhaps a collision mask problem?

I set up some slopes (squares cut diagonally so it's an isometric triangle with a 1px incline) and for whatever reason, running down a slope seems strange. For example, if you running down a slope and jump, it the jump is stunted just like when using moving platforms that move in the same direction as the slope is going. Also, the sprite (using bounding box collision) doesn't seem to run smoothly down them. It is like he's walking forward a few pixels, then falling down back onto the slope. This makes using Jump while on slopes kind of iffy because it might think he's in the air.

Does anyone else have these kinds of issues?

I might as well bring another thing up too. When running quickly along a solid platform (or something that ends at one point) and trying to jump off, it isn't very forgiving. Sometimes it feels like the button just isn't registering quick enough so I have to press Jump in advance or just stand still and do it, otherwise I'm already off the platform. The player is not moving THAT fast, so I don't know why it acts like this. Jumps need to be super precise...or else, lol.

I can't think of anyway you could do this with the current version of the plugin. I'll see if I can get functionality like this into the rewrite.

That would be awesome!

Thanks for putting the effort into making your plugin even better!

As a possible feature for the next version, it would be really great to be able to have more control over grid scroll zones. Mainly, I want zones to be able to have shapes like L or T, meaning, not just made out of the single shape that I choose as my grid zone object. Maybe it could just "combine" different instances of the object into one grid zone? That way a single square object could be used for all sorts of grid zones.

I'm trying to make different shaped scroll zones with the Advanced Camera Plugin. Rectangular zones, are easy of course, but I'm wondering how to make more complex zones. They'd still be using right angles as though two or more rectangles were put together. Is there a way to do this? Imagine an L or T shape.

I should note that:

1) A lot of major commercial games tell which engines/technology they're using when they start

2) Realtime shadows is not a good idea in general anyway. It's better to bake lighting in almost every (if not every) case. (heard this from someone who works with 3D stuff and would know)

3) Some of those things won't matter at all depending on the game being made.

Yeah, UDK is a lot better engine from the technical side, but it is harder. We're not comparing programs with identical uses. UDK smokes Unity for how great the engine itself is. Unity3D is a lot easier, especially for indies (who are probably working alone). If UDK works for you and you don't mind not having the easier tools of Unity, use UDK. Really though, with anything big like programming, modelling, and doing all the other work for a 3D game, know what you're getting into and make sure you choose the right tool for you! There's nothing quite like putting a lot of time into something then not getting it finished...

Everyone who wants to know what each difference between Unity versions should read this: http://unity3d.com/unity/licenses.html

I've noticed things have gotten pushed more towards "heavy-duty" programming and most people aren't going to get anything made with either of these engines (even as relatively "easy" Unity is). Are there any 3D programs made for a similar level to GM, Construct, etc? I think those should be listed too as more people will find them usable.

Note: I'm not a Unity lover if I'm coming off like that. I just want people to be educated. Besides, we need someone on each side of the discussion, right? That way more information gets out.

— Wolf

If you would have read my post and followed the link you would not have been confused.

end of line....

I read the entire post. If you read my post (which you probably did) or your own (which you probably did), you should know that you made it sound like it cost $2,500 for the license. Really, you said something unclear. No need to jump on me about it.

NO Mr Wolf you responded before you really read what I posted. LOL Go back and reread again I even gave you the link.

I posed $99 Royalty bearing and later explained that all games for sale you then pay only $99. "In other words if you made a game to sell it is only $99" How much more clear do you want it?

The $2,500 Per seat is for a corporation that uses the program in hose for sales demos and not for distributed to a third party.

BTW can you post of of your unity games? I would like to see them.

For the most part, UnityPro is the equivalent of a corporate license for companies making over $100,000. That's it's main difference. I read what you said, but I wasn't sure what Per Seat meant.

In that same post, you then said "But you you do make something amazing then the $2,500 will be a drop in the bucket compare to the profits."

That sure made is sound like you have to pay $2,500 for commercial licensing. Please don't be unclear then then act like it was my fault.

No need to discuss this further.

>

> Why work with something that most indies cannot afford even if they make something good? Also, even great indie games often don't make much (if any) money. I don't know what you mean about getting the full package.

>

> Also, there's not much extra that comes with Unity Pro. Mostly it's just for companies that can afford to pay for their license whereas indies cannot. Trust me, there's not a big difference.

>

You can't afford $99 once you finish you game to sell? *blink*

Bottom line is the full page of UDK is free ($99 if you want to sell) full package of Unity is $$$

Why did you write $2,500 then? What was that price for? That caused the misunderstanding.

It's a little misleading to act like the normal version of Unity isn't a complete package. Have you ever used Unity3D? It sounds like you don't really know/understand the differences between Unity and UnityPro.

>

> I said for indies. Can CryEngine 3 or Unreal Engine 3 be used commercially for free?

>

unreal licensing

$99 Royalty bearing

$2,500 Per seat

http://www.udk.com/licensing

But that is putting the cart before the horse. Get it and play with it. Changes are you will never actually make a commercial game so no biggie. But you you do make something amazing then the $2,500 will be a drop in the bucket compare to the profits.

the big draw of this over Unity is you get the full package. you have to pay for Unity Pro.

Why work with something that most indies cannot afford even if they make something good? Also, even great indie games often don't make much (if any) money. I don't know what you mean about getting the full package.

Also, there's not much extra that comes with Unity Pro. Mostly it's just for companies that can afford to pay for their license whereas indies cannot. Trust me, there's not a big difference.

> You can get around the else sub-event issue by using a function call.

>

Yes, that is one workaround. There are others, too. And it proves that the event system is flexible enough. But shouldn't it be unnecessary to find workarounds? It's the core of Construct, it should get more attention, I think.

I agree. The only workarounds needed should be for things Construct cannot do, rather than for bugs.

Yes and I am discussing about non-programmer's engines too they are rare but exist, Unity3D may be the easiest programmers engine tough but not the best, the best would be either CryEngine 3 (Used by Crysis 2) or Unreal Development Kit.

I said for indies. Can CryEngine 3 or Unreal Engine 3 be used commercially for free?