It would also require any plugs that use tags, as well as Construct to be changed.

As Julmust said, changing the animation is just as effective, and allows even more possibilities.

That depends on how they integrated the update. As long the current tags (none, stopped, walking, and jumping) remain intact it's possible to keep the current interoperability between plug-ins and older games intact.* But even if they can't alter the current Construct (or it's not worth it), this is something they should consider in designing Construct 2.0.

But really, they'd have to change Construct? Isn't that the point of feature requests? Any feature request is going to change Construct in some fashion.

Did I post in the wrong forum? Jeeze. >.<

*Those plug-ins that did rely on animation tags, if the authors didn't want to rewrite them, would could update their documentation to say that their plugins only work correctly with default tags and they aren't responsible for bugs related to using custom tags.

Edit: Anyway, I didn't meant to get into a big fight about it. It was just meant to be a friendly suggestion. : / Thanks for the suggestions. I just think usability features count as feature requests.

Well, the default tags have higher priority over any custom tags you assign animations. So, if you have a guy standing with "stopping" it will override any custom tag you have because it's jacked in directly so to speak.

So, don't use the default tags. You will actually be hampered by it. Just do it by yourself -- it's very easy! Assign "animations names" and use them instead and don't use the tags.

The nice thing about animation tags (not names) is exactly that, the included platforming tools handles those changes for you. That's the point of my request, extending how smart the platforming tools are to include custom tags and automatically handle those changes.

Yes, I can go through and use the animation names to make the changes by using the none tag and redoing all that logic in event layout or a python script. It's annoying busy work that the framework of sprite objects, platforming behavior, animator and tags should be able to eliminate. Custom tags is basically the next logical extension of their included tools.

So in other words, I'm not asking for help in how to do it. I've mostly figured that out (with the exception of some minor problems with secondary objects keying off the first sprite objects animation). I know it's possible without using tags. Rather this is a feature request to naturally extend the existing framework and concepts in a direction they are already going and make construct more user friendly and intuitive in the process.

Because it's sloppy? The game I'm making is a randomized platformer, where I want to be able to not only easily add and organize new tilesets but also mobs, traps, items, etc. Creating dummy layouts or dragging off mobs and then destroying them, etc just seems kludgy to me. When I work on something, I tend to organize it as I want it to be finished as I go. If I have 30 possible mobs, I don't want the event logic running for all of them if I'm only using 10 in a given level.

So here's a question then, if I destroy the last instance of an object in all layouts, does it prevent me from creating a new instance (like in the editor) or does it keep the object definition live? If I can create a dummy layout and then choose my enemies, destroy the others and then repeat the process at the beginning of a new level, that's workable but unwieldy.

Edit: Admittedly I'm new to Construct, so I'm still learning it's ins and outs. Event Groups seems to be the way to keep unwanted event logic from executing for anyone else that's interested.

Ok, so I can create a dummy layout that isn't used other than to store objects? Will this run all the events associated with the object?

So let's say I have a mob layout with 10 mobs on it, each a sprite object with its own event behavior. I copy mobs 1-3 to my main layout (where the game takes place), will the event logic execute for all mobs (1-10) every tick or just for the mobs 1-3?

Thanks for the help.

Hi-

So I'd like to be able to create objects, without instancing them in a layout. Gamemaker lets you define and organize (w/ folders) objects without necessarily having to put them in your room (layout). For example, in my game, I plan on having several different tilesets for randomization as well as monsters. However, any sprite object I create seems to need to exist on some layout layer. If I delete it from the layout, it disappears from my object list.

Is there anyway to do this in construct that I'm missing?

Thank you very much,

Zomd

Hi-

I was just requesting that the platform tools included with construct also allowed us to create, modify, use in expressions, and assign to controls (or custom platform states) custom animation tags, instead of being locked into stopped, none, walking, and jumping.

If you try to use the tags it seems to interfere with attack animations or alternate animations because of the way the Platform tools default to stopped. I'm basically having to recreate what the Platform system does automatically with tags to avoid it. I'm setting all my tags to none and then using the event editor to change animations.

Thanks,

Zomd

Edit: Thinking about this more, creating custom (and accessible) Animator tags for a given sprite object is basically integrating handling sprite (or character states) into the platform tools. It could at least be used that way.