Cosmetic

New releases and general discussions.

Post » Sun May 11, 2008 5:48 pm

THX u so mutch Ashley,

As you can see in the included cap,
the behaviour of the ball runs out off sync with the events.

This way a lot of the collissions escape.

There are 2 ways to solve this.

Use (1) a bullet behaviour and calculate the bounces in events yourself. Easy for the walls. Since they are BIG BIG cirkels we can assume the objects go trough the middlepoint when they aproach the walls. And bounce back mirrord arround the normals.
Thats (180 - .angle), (360 - . angle) and (0 - .angle) .

Must be not that difficult to do with the collisions with the cirkels. I know the size of the cirkel. I know the dx and dy between x1,y1 cirkel and x2,y2 aproaching object.
I think it bounces around the tangent.
I got to google this to be sure.

But.. oh man, not using all those nice behaviours ? Thats a shame eh ?

The other (2) solution is to start each block events with "flow" events. They are interruptable.
And to give the plugins (behaviours) events that can interrupt the other events (in a later stage of the developping)

Also, there is another advantage. Its important to make the dissicion to run a certain event or not, as early as possible in the event and with the fastes tools available. Only this way u build speed in big caps.

The fastest tools are the hardcoded system events, and as far as i can see, u did a great job on them.

I am sorry that i made the wrong statement about "global variables" beeing slower. I ofcourse had to test this out. And i was wrong.

About using more "tags", tags as in usernames.

Several times i gave up on this. Each time i gave the username a non existing e-mail and a random password. Thats for me as user the only way i can find to delete a username.

I was't gonna come back, each time.

But then a few days later, i took it up again. Made a .cap illustrating the things that i missed. And i knew its worth it all.

So ty for lookin into what i suggested.

I stil have this need in my veins to make this .cap that shows events combined in a way that should not be allowed by the wizzard. You gonna hate me (again) for it ? or is it um ok to do so ?
B
3
S
2
G
4
Posts: 322
Reputation: 2,119

Post » Mon May 12, 2008 7:28 am

We don't hate people for showing if something's wrong with Construct - that's what beta is for, to find possible problems and try to fix them.
I for one would be interested in seeing said .cap, for insight on what others think is the 'wrong' way to combine events.
B
3
S
2
G
4
Posts: 130
Reputation: 1,735

Post » Mon May 12, 2008 2:41 pm

Let me state (again) that i am not here to demolish Construct.

I fully realise that the render engine is in beta, and the control engine is probaly in alfa.
I stated several times that i think the Whole is a great concept.
I know that i use rough english, i dont even speak it !!

And on top, i did't drink from the Holy Grale. I overlook things. There are things that i dont understand yet.

Althaught i produced some .caps, i still feel Newbie. And as long as Construct is not announced by Ashley as "close to finished", no one can be "expert".

All i do is drop "situations", point out "quirks", and show ways to "alternatives". I think its very cheap to critize and dont bring alternatives yourself. That is not how i am.

So look into this .cap, think a minute about what u see/read. Plz dont give me solutions. There are work arrounds, Construct is flexible. Look at it from the point of "should the wizzard allow this" .. and if yes, why ?

Ty

http://www.mediafire.com/?nhm5g1tym1j
B
3
S
2
G
4
Posts: 322
Reputation: 2,119

Post » Mon May 12, 2008 4:45 pm

Well, what you're doing is fine, but it comes off wrong. Instead of making a challenge to the community (which IS here to offer solutions and workarounds), make an request directly for a change or addition. I can't speak for the others, but to me the way you've been making points about construct comes off as more combative than constructive (forgive the pun).

If you can do this, not only will we all get along better but we might get things done more efficiently. Got a bug report? Supply a small .cap to display it. Have a feature request? Keep it to a couple of clean paragraphs and encourage further discussion. These things help you help us help Rich and Ashley. :)

I'll start by apologizing for my bit of snideness earlier. I should have stuck to trying to help out instead of complaining.
B
3
S
2
G
4
Posts: 310
Reputation: 2,120

Post » Mon May 12, 2008 6:08 pm

Captain i have no problem with you, never had.

You produce the most .caps that have a something to learn from. You been most helpfull.
And i love the flow in your english. I also learn from that.

But as i said before. The "makers" of construct got to "review" the "control engine".
Thats not a command.
Thats an on facts based statement with no strings attached.
Its not judging.
I think i produced enough facts now. Dry and clean.

But considering my position, and the stranger i get taken for,
the statement is just a wish and wishfull thinking.
Do i have to express that ? In attitude and in a language thats not mine ?

I am not able to.

I am not able to take "sensibilty" in account when i write english.

I read it 50 times faster then Dutch, because my brains do not pronounce the words, they are soundless. And i dont get the nuances too.

I write it 20 times faster then dutch because, there is no mental spellchecker reading with me, my brain is not bizzy with "ethics' not whith "beaty of the words", not with ritme, sound and "sensibility"

But when i get comments, like i had, what do you expect me to answer ?
B
3
S
2
G
4
Posts: 322
Reputation: 2,119

Post » Tue May 13, 2008 1:12 pm

I had a quick look over the example with the 10 example events. Here's a very quick review:

1 - triggers as subevents to triggers shouldn't be allowed, i'll try to fix
2 - as above
3 - nothing wrong with this: when global value = 0, pick a random object. That makes perfect sense.
4 - it's up to you to order your conditions correctly. It doesn't actually matter which way round they are, but as you say, it might be clearer to say 'Global value = 5, pick objects with height < 6'. However, I don't think the IDE should enforce the order of your conditions here, since different ordering might make more sense in different situations, for readability.
5 - triggers should be first condition, i'll try to fix
6 - Makes perfect sense, will loop until y >= 400
7/8 - Not sure whats wrong here?
9 - string literals shouldn't be able to be passed to value parameters, i'll try to fix
10 - What's wrong with this one?
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,952
Reputation: 178,610

Post » Tue May 13, 2008 6:12 pm

1
2
3
Ah yes makes perfect sense in this case. Yet for a general rule. The pick event can be done in a subevent. In general i am not sure about combining "flow events/conditions" with "pick" events/conditions in one undivided blok. Would be an easy straightforwards rule to not do so ?
4
As far as i understand. The routine to pick the objects runs first here. This routine is not instantly, its a bunch of code. Then the flow to the actions get blocked (or not) on the condition. Looks as a waste of CPU time ? And in general, in stead of fixing all those 1 by 1. An overall rule ristricting "flow" events combined with a "pick" event in the same undevided block would fix 95% of the fixes u agree to do ... allready ?
5
6
still think the second line should be a sub event .. sowwy
7
Reads perfect, and should work. But it dont work at all. It seems like .self + 1 actions slip arround collssion dedections. I did not figure out yet why.
8
Runs perfectly, while 7 dont do what u expect. In base i tried to point to the high "try and error" level in learning construct. And thats not only because of bugs Ashley. Bugs are still accepted in this stage of developping. You know that.
9
10
This is or a nasty bug, or i did something nasty. I started my early .caps over alot because of this one. Make the group "active" and run the event. See the error. It happens when you copy/paste a sprite to another layer, while deleting the orginal sprite. And yes i know you can drag objects from layer to layer in the layers pane. I figured that out after i found what caused the error.


99.
I wanted max. 10 points. Its no more then trying to let you see that "reviewing" the sheet engine is needed. I am sorry if i was a bother on the road to this point. I am sorry that i defended my ass.
B
3
S
2
G
4
Posts: 322
Reputation: 2,119

Previous

Return to Construct Classic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests