Spawn Behavior Option Suggestion

  • Add a “Roatation” entry box to the spawn behaviors.

    We should be able to choose location and rotation naturally.

  • Sounds like a awesome idea and could help a lot of people.
    Just curious, how would it work?
    Like a drag so that its able to rotate in a circle?

  • It would just be an entry box, for something like the speed value on the move behaviors.

    I think that a rotation circle would clutter an already complex looking behavior.

  • @Thecheater887 Why not just set the rotation yourself? If they add a rotation add a rotation slot, then they also need to add scale, Z-order, physics...

  • @GameCRAZY
    There's millions (billions) of reasons to be able to propagate changes from a "parent" to its created children. Without this ability, those of us that are accustomed to thinking with this kind of freedom of creativity (and expressivity) are both constrained and bothered, to varying degrees.

    If you don't know why this might be a problem then you don't have the same sorts of problems.

  • @Deeeds I don't. Give me an example when you would need to use this.

  • If they add a rotation add a rotation slot, then they also need to add scale, Z-order, physics...

    yes. You're getting it. If you'll excuse the pun.

    Universal getters and setters are required. And references.


    And from what Hyperpad has said, they are working on better solutions.

  • @GameCRAZY Spawning shields around a motherlode.

    8 shields, each 45 degrees more rotationally than the last.
    One parent.

  • @Thecheater887 Set an attribute somewhere (0).

    Each time you spawn a new object, get the attribute and add 1 to it; then set it to that value. Multiply this value by 45 to get the number of degrees to rotate by.

    All these behaviors should be in the object that is being spawned. That way they will be triggered every time.

    @Deeeds None of this is important at all. I would rather IAP, prefabs, lighting, gesture behaviors, functions, change collision, and bug fixes; however, undo options would also be pretty nice.

  • I think this all comes down to everyone’s personal update priorities! And what they want fixed/added. LOL

  • @GameCRAZY Spawning is a fill in for object instancing.

    A very limited version of it, further constrained by not taking advantage of what should be done, namely incorporating low-hanging-fruit advantages to any work arounds.

    In Spawning, that's 2 things.

    1. Creating references (not going to happen easily because nobody has thought about this FROM THE PRODUCT'S CONCEPTION and the two "designers" are in a stasis of decision paralysis and bereft of diverse understanding of what's possible, and constrained by the legacy of their original decisions around making something WITHOUT surfaced referencing.

    2. Instant osmosis in spawned objects from a blend of their parent and their destination object's properties as they are and as they were.

    Right now it's only possible to spawn with the attributes of the parent, as it was. The parent can't be modified (dynamically) and have spawns gather (or not) those changes. You only get spawns of the original. You also don't get to blend in the qualities of object upon which the spawns are created, despite the position of this object being accessed, nothing else about it is transparent to the spawns.

    That's TWO huge missed opportunities to create dynamic spawning and dynamic objects.

    Two huge opportunities that are both short sighted and incredibly limiting, because... THERE IS NO REFERENCING.

    When you don't have referencing, it should have been a matter of common sense to provide selectable osmosis from altered parents and whatever the spawning destination object has in terms of attributes. That would be a nearly complete work around to the issues of not having referencing or proper instancing, and provided enormous creative capacity, with ease for both developers and users.

    But it looks like nobody even ever considered this.

    The two people you see commenting and critiquing this short sightedness are up against three who want to think that all that's possible is the way they currently perceive using spawning. You're not seeing what spawning can be in terms of instancing and thinking prefabs are the golden solution.

    As I've said elsewhere, fix the issues of not having referencing (and proper instancing) and you do not need prefabs because the results, blended with smart use of spawning (an already 'half done' feature) are both more powerful and more flexible than prefabs.

    Spawning plus references plus instancing plus awareness and parenting = FAR greater power than prefabs without the need to create new workflows, new terminology or much in the way of new UI. And all of this can be incorporated into the way hyperPad works now, in a holistic, discoverable and sensible manner.

    But because prefabs are in Unity... (and poorly done there...) you're going to get a cutdown version of that because they can conceive of that and think it's a headline feature (they can say "we have prefabs" and pretend people might know what that means and consider hyperPad because of it).

    It's far better to have proper instancing, referencing and parenting in the simplest, most elegant and natural form possible, that most easily incorporates itself into how hyperPad is as a world builder. But that would be far too sensible.

    So, instead, look forward to another gem of naming conventions and word-soup like you've come to know and love with Broadcasting, Messaging, Event Keys and Receivers filling in for functions and their invoking. It will be focus study tested. Perhaps even some of the jumble and borderline contradictions and contrariness that is the verbiage of Value Behaviours and Value Arrays.

  • Aaaaaaaaargh another wall of text 🤯

  • @Aidan-Oxley Argh, another person afraid of the tiny seconds it takes to read.

    I type faster than I talk.

  • @Deeeds You mean HOOOOURS! Ok, seriously, a minute or 2, any less and I won’t understand what you’re saying fully. I type like 5x slower than I speak and I only use a few fingers.

  • @Aidan-Oxley You probably read 4x to 10x faster than you speak.

  • @Deeeds Honestly, I don’t. I usually have to read a sentence more than once before I understand it fully.

  • @Aidan-Oxley

    I usually have to read a sentence more than once before I understand it fully.

    Everyone does.

  • @Deeeds Maybe you’re right. I haven’t timed myself, maybe I should, try to get an exact number 😛

  • @Aidan-Oxley said in Spawn Behavior Option Suggestion:

    @Deeeds Maybe you’re right. I haven’t timed myself, maybe I should, try to get an exact number 😛


    The only outside chance is that you read more than 10x faster than you can listen. It won't be less than 4x. That's where the severely disadvantaged sit in the reading time spectrum. The thing that you don't probably don't realise is that time slows down when you're reading because you so heavily focus when doing it. You're so busy processing and absorbing and considering that (when reading) you'll often think much more time has passed than actually has.

Log in to reply