Lets talk Isometric

New releases and general discussions.

Post » Tue May 12, 2009 5:51 pm

I'm saying for the standard squished diamond isometric shape, which does require a half-height grid to snap properly. Here's a CAP showing what I'm talking about:

Diamond Isometric Grid
Moderator
B
98
S
36
G
19
Posts: 1,584
Reputation: 17,717

Post » Tue May 12, 2009 6:59 pm

Then adding more options to grid edits would solve that problem? Maybe adding an option to "rotate" the grid and whatnot.
B
2
G
3
Posts: 10
Reputation: 870

Post » Tue May 12, 2009 7:22 pm

[quote="linkman2004":3k1apeci]I'm saying for the standard squished diamond isometric shape, which does require a half-height grid to snap properly. Here's a CAP showing what I'm talking about:

Diamond Isometric Grid[/quote:3k1apeci]

Ok I guess we dont need a change in the grid, since somehow its snapping correctly now. :?

:oops: Bah ok moving on, what else is needed? Like sprite movement, z height, z order, etc.
Image Image
B
161
S
48
G
90
Posts: 7,347
Reputation: 66,749

Post » Tue May 12, 2009 7:30 pm

I think some stuff would be easier with an isometric behavior for movement, or options for the look of the grid, but as it is now, it's not too difficult to get it to work

it's not like these complex workarounds, know what I mean?
Spriter Dev
B
87
S
21
G
12
Posts: 3,240
Reputation: 16,461

Post » Tue May 12, 2009 7:31 pm

[quote="linkman2004":exa1xd0c]I'm saying for the standard squished diamond isometric shape, which does require a half-height grid to snap properly. Here's a CAP showing what I'm talking about:

Diamond Isometric Grid[/quote:exa1xd0c]

Somehow I didn't see this when I posted earlier. :) Nice example, guess there's really no need for changes in the grid system.
B
2
G
3
Posts: 10
Reputation: 870

Post » Tue May 12, 2009 10:03 pm

Come to think of it, you would need some way of setting up a grid internally.
Off the top of my head I would probably go with
For each object (ordered)
Family object terrain
ordered by x ascending.
Used in conjunction with the array object you should be able to get x, y, and z stored fairly easy.
Image Image
B
161
S
48
G
90
Posts: 7,347
Reputation: 66,749

Post » Wed May 13, 2009 1:21 am

iso behaviour would be nice, since all iso stuff is pretty much doing the same thing. although i doubt any devs would have time for it so close to the 1.0 release and end of school year.
B
52
S
7
G
6
Posts: 1,945
Reputation: 7,610

Post » Wed May 13, 2009 3:23 am

and you could always do your own map editor in construct :)

plus, you've got square tiles, triangular tiles and hexagonal tiles. They're all made with just flat sprites (no skewing needed!) but placing is different. You can even do them using tilemaps (which I eagerly await :P). It's very ad-hoc so I'd say it's better to do a map editor oneself.
B
3
S
2
G
4
Posts: 1,445
Reputation: 4,665

Post » Wed May 13, 2009 9:38 am

The grid suggestions are decent and you should put them on the feature tracker; they'll definitely make it into 2.0.
B
3
S
2
G
5
Posts: 1,777
Reputation: 5,529

Post » Wed May 13, 2009 10:42 am

@ Rich
All right, added offset grid to the tracker. Although we dont really need it for iso, it would be a big help visually. Plus it could be used with other types of maps like hex.

@ Quasi
Yeah I figure we better start figuring out exactly what we need, just saying we need an iso behavior is going to leave things way to open, especially since there are so many ways to do it.
We need to start identifying any features, optimizations, before someone starts making a behavior.
Image Image
B
161
S
48
G
90
Posts: 7,347
Reputation: 66,749

PreviousNext

Return to Construct Classic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests