Petres

Yup we could have done that if it wasn't live recording.

Even for the extra videos they were made live so you could access them on twitch, just to be consistant.

You can't upload pre made videos on twitch.

And you can't really write xml using the XML plugin, it's only for xml parsing.

You would have to build the xml yourself via events.

czar

thanks (:

czar

Yup good catch.

Maybe put a link to your solution, if people have the same issue one day (:

yonda

Actually I think round(random(0,3)) is wrong

random(0,3) will give you numbers from 0 to almost 3

so you'll get this repartition:

0----------1----------2----------

0-----|-----1-----|-----2-----|-----
to 0  |   to 1    |    to 2   | to 3    

0----------|1----------|2----------|3----------
    to 0   |    to 1   |    to 2   |    to 3

Ludum dare, I haz it!

http://www.ludumdare.com/compo/ludum-dare-26/?action=preview&uid=5046

<img src="http://www.ludumdare.com/compo/wp-content/compo2/233892/5046-shot0.jpg" border="0">

\o/

—

hmmmmmmmm

You mean, catching a trigger event in an infinite while loop?...

hmmmmmmmm....

Nah won't work if you work inside another trigger (function/on start of layout)

So I don't see what you mean by that then (: example?

cesarzevil

I don't mean to talk in place of Ashley but what I think could be a solution is:

you send your capx to him, he can look at it and test it, and if he admits your game can't be optimize at all without entirely changing the gameplay, maybe, he can refund your license.

But please don't take my word for it, it's just an idea. The problem with refund, is that he can't really inactivate your license file. So I'm pretty sure it's not something really possible.

But at least, it would answer one important question: can your game be made to work on today's smartphones.

Because up until now, except for angry useless provocative talks, nothing really changed. And I'm pretty sure that between a working game and a refund, you would rather prefer a working game.

We don't really know if your low fps is a result of your inexperience, or really a too demanding design.

If Ashley doesn't really have time to look at it, I'm pretty sure, you can send your capx to some of the guy here who proposed to help and have more than 2,000 Rep (which means they are pretty active here, so well known, so usually trustworthy and no thieves).

We usually prefer to work on our own idea (:

I would gladly propose to help, unfortunately I don't own any smartphone to test anything, so it would make things a bit hard.

I could still look at it if there are obvious flows, but not much.

Once again, please try to not get angry over people trying to help (:

Jase00

As far as I know, all "object condition" (meaning, not the system conditions) behaves like this:

- loop through all instances
[ul]
	[li]if an instance match the condition, add the instance to a picking list[/li]
[/ul]  -> then apply action to this picking list

Jase00

Can't you add a boolean like attacker.ignored and switch it to true (somehow), and then use attacker: [invert] is ignored instead of attacker: [invert] pick by UID someUID ?

JoyfulDreamer

Yeah that's a valid way, I don't deny it. But the "asynchronousity" of the pathfinder makes it a bit of a pain to implement.

(I think even the map generation is asynchronous and there's no trigger for that... might have to request that)

And as far as speed goes, he only does that on start of layout it seems. So.. it should be ok as long as he doesn't have more than maybe 2000 grid cell (since I used recursivity, you might stack overflow)

Jase00

Maybe you could show a sample of the code that is breaking.

I'm wondering if removing the ability to invert pick by UID is a problem or not.

In my situation explained above, I could solve the problem with a boolean.

So it's less "sad" as I thought at first.

But if you really found a case where the work around is messy, it would be a good argument to convince Ashley of the necessity of it (:

also, I don't really understand how using Object UID exists is really equivalent to Pick by UID as suggested in the changelog.Pick by UID' is now not invertible (use 'Object UID exists' system condition instead)nless Ash meant it as "now you don't need to use Pick by UID to check if an object's UID exists" But I don't think it was the principal use of this action.