Zantium's Forum Posts

  • Zantium Saving your a lot of time... you should have told them you're discovering a bug about "Physic" behavior with collision conflicts transparent tiles.

    Joannesalfa I did in my 3rd post. Until then I didn't know it was just with physics enabled objects (and it's the same whether it's immovable or not) as I thought I was missing something and didn't know that the collision box view didn't work as it appeared to work in Ashley's blog.

    Once I knew that the collision box view was a red herring then I was able to pinpoint the problem further.

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • Ashley - no problem, I've stripped a lot of the assets out and put a tilemap below where the rocket starts with a few tiles in place. You can see the rocket cannot pass through the tilemap object area.

    dropbox.com/s/nhj1df1taa0zodj/Asteroid%20Lander%200.7%20tilemap.capx

    Numpad keys to control - 4=rotate left, 6=rotate right, 8=major thrust, 5=minor thrust.

  • Ashley - OK, so the 'show collision polys' not working is a bug/feature, it helps to know it's not going to show what I expect.

    That's not actually what I'm referring to though, I mean it wasn't working during runtime which I noted here 'this manifests itself as not being able to fly into the tilemapped area, or if I spawn the ship in the middle of it, I can't move and it just flickers and spins on the spot."

    anata I've tried using the solid behavior but when it's turned on, the above happens.

    Is the tilemap not compatible with all other movement plugins? I have a mixture of custom (rotate) and physics (for impacts/thrust/lifting) in my project as it's a lander type game.

    Edit: Now I know that the 'show collision polys' bit wasn't working as expected I went back into my project and tried again. I have found that the incompatibility is with tilemaps and the physics behavior. With physics turned on, the whole tilemap becomes an impenetrable object.

    Ashley is this fixable or are those just not going to work together? I keep finding limits that stop me making my ideas work and sending me back to the drawing board. :)

  • Rather than stripping everything out of my existing project I've started a new project, put a tilemap object in, drawn a few tiles in it and set the interface to show collision boxes.

    dropbox.com/s/3wgoub1c7he21uh/Tilemap_whole_object_collision.jpg

    Edit: The forum image code doesn't work so I can't show the inline image.

    Note there is only one collision box and it's the whole object.

    In my game where I was going to use tilemaps for the terrain, this manifests itself as not being able to fly into the tilemapped area, or if I spawn the ship in the middle of it, I can't move and it just flickers and spins on the spot.

    Capx here;

    dropbox.com/s/qbb7u5yw4s5zk7g/Tilemap_whole_object_collision.capx

    What am I missing? I assumed there was something I needed to toggle or tick somewhere with the object to make it pick the tiles themselves as collision areas but after several hours going round in circles, I can't find anything. <img src="smileys/smiley5.gif" border="0" align="middle" />

  • I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean.

  • I've been trying different methods for drawing the ground surface in a lander type game I'm working on. When I saw the release notes for r152 and the tilemap implementation here scirra.com/blog/ashley/3/tech-blog-tilemap-tidbits

    I thought it would be ideal.

    In this blog Ashley says that spaces/non-tiles are not used for collisions, but for me, I can only get the collision box to be the entire tilemap object.

    I've tried changing every setting I can find but I cannot get the collision boxes to be "tiles only". Is this broken in r152?

  • Hello guys,

    As most of you may already know Google Chrome Frame project will be retired on Jan 2013

    Just a quick correction, it's Jan 2014 for the retirement.

  • Thanks MobWthPitchforks, yes I bet that would have worked for me.

    In the end though, I had a somewhat workable system with custom movement but I wanted to add some physics as well.

    I found that mixed together they just don't work for collisions etc, I'd need to do a complete custom movement collision system and another complete physics one so I switched to just using physics instead and played with that until I got similar flight characteristics.

  • I get it all the time, even just typing a couple of sentences in a reply or a PM. If it's on the list, that's fine though.

  • AlexandreBelmont

    I still think you're trying to do it the hard way, or at leaswt differently than I'd do it.

    For your angled jump animation, just use an angled hit box to fit it and use that instead of trying rotate the existing one.

    Or, instead of using a separate hit box, define one on the animated character itself but stick to the rectangle still for consistent hit detection. This way you could change the hitbox per frame to exactly where you wanted it.

    Oh and on the origin point part for turning in the air, you can set the point differently for each animation frame. You can also add extra points.

  • Wouldn't you just be better having different animations for jumping and dashing and play those when appropriate?

    Also looking at your code, I wouldn't use the sprite as a condition e.g. 16-19 and 23-24. I'd use the player (Skip?) instead and the sprite mirrored/not mirrored/rotation as the action.

  • I'm making a space type game, sort of Lunar Lander/Jetpack/Thrust sort of feel.

    I'm going to have the ship fly inside a cavern for instance and it will take damage if it hits a surface too hard - none of this part is a problem.

    However, as I'm using custom movement, I can't work out how to get the ship to bounce off at a shallow angle when colliding. I thought about using the platform behavior but I couldn't get it working for flight as I wanted. I can get it to reverse direction to keep it out of the solid but it goes directly backwards and I want something more like skipping a stone on water.

    The inverse angle of impact would be ideal but it needs to work on vertical surfaces, or whatever the particular piece of ground may be angle at.

    Any ideas?

  • Zantium: Issue number 3 is something I'm also worried about. Do you have any proposals of working around this? Isn't this simply how construct 2 works, and that I simply need to optimize my sprites better?

    Tinimations - I've had a look through your CAPX and it looks to be the backgrounds that are going to cause you memory problems.

    FirstBackground is 1900x1900 for instance, the Chaser/s (not backgrounds) are quite big but there are a lot of Clouds at 1024x1952.

    I too wanted to draw nice big backgrounds, I mean it's not doing anything how hard can it be to process right? Ashley pointed me towards his blog post on the subject, very much worth a read: scirra.com/blog/112/remember-not-to-waste-your-memory

    When I was playing with C2 I had the idea of moving dynamic (morphing) clouds in the background in a platform game. To that end I "made" a dynamic cloud generator using the particle system. I'm sure something similar could save you a lot of memory as it can be tweaked using the same 2 particle generators to produce different effects.

    youtu.be/7SCnpf9zh_Q

  • Very interesting looking game there.

    Some observations from running it from an IT guy but not a developer of anything - yet;

    1. It could do with a performance monitor/hud output showing FPS and renderer used.

    2. It doesn't appear to use WebGL as there's no GPU usage showing on my monitor and even my little test games register on this.

    3. It spawns 2 instances of the .exe plus a Chrome.exe over 45-50 individual threads, together these use around 950Mb of memory just into the second area.

    4. The "defend all angles" bit is so hard I couldn't get any further to test how much this would grow by!

    5. I couldn't find a way to exit the game.

    6. On an i5-3450, performance was fine in game, the title screens looked slower maybe 15fps but hard to say without a monitor, this wasn't cpu or gpu bound though using 10-15% CPU (but no GPU).

    You may know all of the above already, but I test/troubleshoot system performance in my work and look for bottlenecks so maybe it's just something I'm used to doing.

  • thehen Seconded, it has great tutorial written all over it.