Everade's Recent Forum Activity

  • I don't think that ashley should pre-code every single thing for us just to make it easier for everyone.

    If it's possible per events (not hardcore workarounds), it should be fine.

    Of course, some basics should be available, i'm not trying to get rid of everything, nor would i hate to have such features.

    My personal and most important things i'm still wishing for are:

    Basic support for isometric games (At the current stage it's simply a huge experiment everyone has to go through and there's no good nor real solution in any part of an isometric environment. Unless for professional coders maybe)

    True and dedicated multiplayer support.

    Looking forward to more great and actually released PC Games using Construct.

  • —

    sqiddster

    I've never came this far with my projects, so i've never had these issues nor have i reproduced them.

    Still trying to help you out in case it's an actual issue which i may run into in near future.

    Left comments on both pages.

    Cheers

  • Try Construct 3

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

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads

  • delete

  • > The key is to avoid per-instance work for every instance in the layout, and to narrow the scope only to the active/visible area of the layout.

    >

    What exactly does per-instance work mean?

    Ashley

    I'm also interested into some more details on this one.

    Are you saying that we should avoid using instances on objects ?

    Or what exactly do you mean?

    And whatever it is, what should we use instead to avoid performance issues?

  • EncryptedCow

    DatapawWolf

    You guys are simply going beyond the multiplayer behaviour capabilities of construct 2.

    The official multiplayer system is a simple signaling server which connects players with each other, so one player will always be the host.

    What you guys are talking about is a simple dedicated server, that's it.

    So as long as you're not going to code a dedicated server, there's no way you're ever going to achieve what you're looking for.

    From what i've read from Ashley so far... he's not really interested into further developing the multiplayer part.

    It looked like he felt that the multiplayer feature was a complete waste of time, because there are not enough people actualy using it. (i'm just interpreting what i've read so far, but his words came pretty close to that) So according to that i would guess that he's not willing to help you in a dedicated server matter.

    (i would love to get my hands on a dedicated server version as well)

    The only way to prevent players to become host right now is, to run the "main game" on your own server.

    What i mean is.... run the game itself on your own private dedicated windows server (for example) which will then always be the host.

    That would prevent players to become host themselfs, and you could offer your players a dedicated bandwith.

    But it's just a simple and bad workaround.

    So either you're going with lennaerts suggestion, which is actually pretty good.

    Or you're going to code your own dedicated server.

    Using lennaerts suggestion would simply mean that creating an actual (dungeon) instance will just be a new player being abused as a new host.

    This would save you an *** full of money rather than being forced to host a dedicated server.

    Of course there's a big downside on that, as you would have to rely on the players internet connection/location.

    But i'm sure you would be able to add some checks on the players connection to prevent such players to become a host.

    If you're actually willing to go for a real MMORPG, just keep in mind that this will require a really fast and big database / a good dedicated server. MMORPGs require the most powerfull servers when it comes to gaming (compared to a shooter for example)

    In short: it's expensive

  • I don't think that i can help in this case, as my project does not require either huge layouts nor multiple ones.

  • [quote:377f8yqv]Modularity

    The ability to create re-usable objects and associated ES code between projects. These can be helpful to one self and the community. They are easy to use and shareable. overall increasing the development of all projects without going through redundancy or trying to copy over complex other projects into a complex project.

    I don't know if you're talking about something similiar, or if it's even the same...

    So just in case

    -------------------

    Create Custom Modular Objects

    What i mean is (for example)

    You've created a monster. This monster isn't just one simple sprite, it may be linked with several other objects together, using custom parameters etc... (additional hit boxes, single arm objects, angle object, and a lot of custom code)

    Now, it would be awesome to simply SAVE this specific model you've created as one single "Object".

    This "Modular Object" could then be shared throughout your other projects or wherever you might need it.

    So if you're going to create a second monster, you can simply get this modular object out of the library (new)!

    Set a new name on it, and it's already in your game. (Event Code will accordingly be adjusted to the new given name)

    From this point it will be really easy to change just a few parameters, replace animations to create a complete new monster.

    If you're creating an army of such monsters, it would be finished in just a few minutes.

    All you would have to do would be changing the animations and maybe some parameters afterwards.

    (Event code could be associated with these objects)

    This could be used across near anything.

    Your custom walls, doors, any characters. Just everything that's complex.

    This should be right inside the interface, and it should give you the option upon using an object from your library to either duplicate specific objects, or use existing ones and bind them together. (for example use the same hit boxes, arms etc which were attached to this object using the container, but create a duplicate of the main sprite)

    Having this right inside the interface would speed up your workflow dramaticaly.

    You could create your own library of complicated modular objects, or share them with other developers (maybe through the market).

    Imagine if you've finished your game, and released it to the public already.

    You recieve great feedback and you decide to create a sequel.

    Just create a new project, use your library and you can use the same assets and customize them just like that!

    Keep in mind

    [quote:377f8yqv]Our goal is to make Construct 3 the best game making editor ever.

    That's what they said

  • a simple and event

    an and event is just a normal "add" event. that's it.

    it would be easier to help you if you could include your .capx file.

  • That not all of your bullets get destroyed, make sure you pick every single one.

    For example:

    -For each Bullet

    -- On collision with Monster ~ Bullet Destroy

    I can't imagine for what reason you've created a container for your shotgun pellets.

    Try to remove it, because according to my knowledge it would destroy all others as well as long as they're within the same container.

    and for the weapon pick up.

    Simply add a "equipped" boolean instance variable to the weapons.

    Then add a check when switching weapons.

    If "equipped" True

    With that you can prevent that you set them invisible while they're still on the floor

  • Then add a check at your firing code, if you should already be able to shoot

    • as soon as the bar is full, set a boolean instance variable (for example: Bar_full set true)
    • if the bar is empty, set this boolean variable to false

    and then add in your firing code another AND check.

    If Bar_full set true

    - you can shoot

  • You do not have permission to view this post

  • If i'm not mistaken then this is what you're looking for.

    At least i think it would work in your case.

    [attachment=0:2z8klq0w][/attachment:2z8klq0w]

    I know that it's not possible to have 3 seperate conditions within an OR block with another 3.

    But i'm sure you can work it out using a different way using sub events.

    Because actually you should never require multiple checks within one Or block.

    Because that can always be added at the top as a first check before going to the actual OR block. (as you can see in the example above)

    So if you require any more AND checks, just at them add the first sub event.

Everade's avatar

Everade

Member since 24 Jun, 2014

Twitter
Everade has 11 followers

Connect with Everade

pixelglance.com

Trophy Case

  • 10-Year Club
  • Entrepreneur Sold something in the asset store
  • Jupiter Mission Supports Gordon's mission to Jupiter
  • Forum Contributor Made 100 posts in the forums
  • x4
    Coach One of your tutorials has over 1,000 readers
  • Regular Visitor Visited Construct.net 7 days in a row
  • Steady Visitor Visited Construct.net 30 days in a row
  • Enduring Visitor Visited Construct.net 90 days in a row
  • RTFM Read the fabulous manual
  • x59
    Quick Draw First 5 people to up-vote a new Construct 3 release
  • x143
    Lightning Draw First person to up-vote a new Construct 3 release
  • x4
    Great Comment One of your comments gets 3 upvotes
  • Delicious Comment One of your comments gets 10 upvotes
  • Magnificent Comment One of your comments gets 25 upvotes
  • Email Verified

Progress

24/44
How to earn trophies