Suggest: Point System

Thecheater887

Based off of Mario Kart Wii's KMP files; similar UI to KMPCloud

overload Spawn on Point add point selection
add world layer Points only for points to be placed.
overload Move to Point add point selection
behavior Rotate to Point
overload Tag allow point and Area added to tag
add world layer area only for box areas to be placed
overload Collided add area
overload Spawn on Area select box area
overload Screen to Point add select point, tag for next point in tag
add switch Game Overview Advanced to show or hide more advanced features such as multiplayer, points, and areas
behavior Original returns true for parent, false for child as text, no options
overload Point add attributes clone object attributes

Murtaza

Can't you just use a empty object for all of this?

I just quickly skimmed the page you linked to. But it looks like they use a specific X/Y coordinate for an entity. In hyperPad you can just use an empty object and it should accomplish a lot of the same sort of things.

Spawn on area (spawn on point) lets you visually select a location on the screen, or manually enter the coordinates.
World layer points.. Spawn on area has a toggle to use screen coordinates, by default it uses world coordinates. You can also create a new layer your self and just use empty objects.
Move to point lets you select a point visually. Just select the object, then move the target. There are also 2 input fields X and Y that let you enter coordinates in manually.
Rotate to point.. Yeah I suppose, but rotate to object works in most situations. Just use an empty object as your point.
Collided - add area... Why not use an empty object as your area? Are you trying to create a dynamic colliding area that can possibly change? I mean, I can sort of see this being useful. But In most cases you can just move a empty object with your player. Especially since you're creating an area(box) and not a specific shape (with many vertices). I think you can achieve the same effect with an empty object.
Spawn on area lets you choose visually, or enter a coordinate manually.
I don't get the points/tags idea?
showing features about your game.. Shouldn't this be your job? I don't under stand what your asking here.
"behavior Original returns true for parent, false for child as text, no options" I don't know what you mean
" overload Point add attributes clone object attributes" I don't know what you mean.

Jack8680

You could use some trig to rotate to a point.

Thecheater887

@Murtaza The system now just doesn't cut it. Too much clutter, too many over complicated workarounds.

I mean a point added with this system, dot or block
That disallows movememont of an object on a separate layer without first moving it the same layer as the other
I mean a point added with this system, dot or block
I mean a point added with this system, dot or block
No. It's a static immovable area, that when an object collides with it, it can either modify the object, destroy it, load a new scene, play a cutscene, change the music or speed, etc. It could also be used for changing layer visibility and luminance.
I mean a point added with this system, dot or block
As of right now, you have to loop through tags, and without attributes and advanced logic, it's not possible without freezing the project. For instance, The intent is, I have 30 objects under the tag "ST". It loops through these objects, and screens to the first one using the specified duration, then the second, then the third, until the loop exits after it has reached the 30th point or object. It then starts a new sequence, or resumes a different pattern. Points being the new system, tags being applied to the new points for organization and logic.
I'm suggesting in the create a game screen, add a toggle allowing you to choose whether or not the features such as a point system and multiplayer are enabled, that way if you aren't ready, or don't need them, they aren't there to distract you, but with big features come Big responsibilities for the daredevils, or those needing the features enabled.
It has to do with a previous suggestion of mine easing the modification of spawned objects. If you can see it in the editor, it is an original object. If you quit your game, and it won't be in the editor, it is not an original object.
Add the ability to use attributes like you do with normal objects on the new points.

If you're willing to try, download the KMPCloud, and either find a KMP file, or I can provide you a link for one when I get back on Saturday. If you at least look at the layout and build shown in KMPCloud, and still don't like it, at least you looked before you leaped.

Murtaza

I still don't see why empty objects can't be used as points.

You need to remember we are a generic game creation tool. Meaning a lot of what we do has to be unable in a wide variety of situations without interfering or working too differently from the rest of the system.

With something like Mario cart they can create a system like this because it only needs to work for one game in a very specific situation.

For us any feature we had has to be useable for everyone.

From what I'm seeing here, there is a lot of work needed for a slightly different way to using empty objects. Doesn't nt look like it would be the best use of our time.

Thecheater887

Okay, I'm going to be blunt, and you're not going to like it one bit.

Empty objects just don't cut it.

If you can repliacate what I'm asking for exactly, or within reason using empty objects, that can be used like Mario Kart, can be used like they do in CoD, Diablo3, Super Smash Bros, Sniper Elite 3, shall I continue, I will issue a public apology in announcements.

Otherwise, this game of cat and mouse can continue. "I don't have time", "We don't have time", "Not everyone will use it" can work two ways. At some point, you have to realize not everyone will use every behavior, like, cmon, how many people use Value, or Movable Platform? At some point, you have to start catering to the majority very everyone, then the minority.

I'm sure I'll get minimally infracted for this, but hey.

Thus is put the only topic this has been done to, nor am I the only person.

TL;DR, you can't use it until it can be proven an effective, and resource-friendly alternative. Point system? 512KB for a large project. Empty objects? 8MB for even a smaller medium.

That adds up. FAST.

I understand you have limits, and bounds, and some things are more effective than others, but "not my problem" never solved anything.

Your tool works as intended. To be a generic time waster, as you described it. You want to stick out? Make a name for yourself? Start listening to the community, and add things that you would expect to see if you tore any modern game apart. Add things no one would expect, and no one knew they needed until they used it. Currently, the only thing that I can tell is different from other top names, is you're on mobile.

Sorry, but the truth hurts. If you want to ban me, I guess I'll just have to be a sacrifice.

Thanks for reading.

Murtaza

The empty object system is basically how almost all games do it. They have a collision shape/model that is an entity with logic applied to it.
Every one of those games do the same thing, even mario kart. The difference is, (specifically int he mario kart example) is that you can create these entities from scratch.

In hyperPad, you have to create the object ahead of time. Yes it's a limitiation, but it's one you'll have to work around. And in most situations it's fine. None of our users have a problem with this, and many AAA titles are built off this exact same method (where a physical object is your entity). For exmaple Unity, Unreal, and Source all work this way.

Are you saying empty objects take up memory? If there is no graphic, the collision area is the only thing that is taking up resources.

Your suggested point system would have this exact fault if it relied on our physics engine/collision system (and as you describe it, sounds like it would). The only way to bypass this would be to do mario style hard coded calculations where it doesn't check if you collided with an object, rather your object is in a specific coordinate. There are pros and cons to this

Using physics bodies to detect collisions: easy for every one, but take up a bit more processing power.
Using raw coordinates: fast, but hard for everyone.

Now that being said let me address some other points:
When I said hyperPad is generic, I didn't mean a generic time waster. I meant it as a general purpose tool. Meaning everything has to work to create platformers, shooters, side scrollers, puzzles, etc etc.
Not generic int he sense it doesn't stand out. Generic in the sense that it doesn't specialize in any one game type.
As you noticed this has it's pros and cons. One con being, we need to make comprises so the tool works in all situations. There are tools out there that are very specific, take "RPG Maker" for example. It is great at making RPGs, but nothing else.

hyperPad is definitely not generic in the technology side, and as far as features go we're comparable to platforms that are on desktop computers. This is no easy feat!

An artist can not blame the tools for not being able to create beautiful art. He can create a masterpiece by dragging a stick in some dirt.

Also, we do listen to the community. More so than any other company (this is actually one of our faults, if I'm honest). I don't get offended easily, but this comment really offends me. We strive to reach out to every user, answer every question, and every suggestion (even if it's silly). No other company does this. Try emailing nintendo with a suggestion, lets see if you get a response, or even smaller developers (a more fair comparison). Very unlikely for them to even entertain your suggestions.

The truth of the matter is you just haven't convinced me that this feature makes sense. I don't see the benefit. Maybe you're not clearly explaining what you want? I don't know. But from where I'm standing I just don't get it (yet). You're more than welcome to try and convince me. And if you really feel this is a feature that would make hyperPad better, then I'm happy to listen and engage in a discussion with you (as I have been doing, and again let me reiterate, very rare for a company to do!). But I won't blindly say ok great idea, let me add it to the list!
Because that doesn't benefit any one.

iTap Development

@Thecheater887 it it very unfair to say that Hyperpad doesn't listen to the community. I have sent them a lot of emails, and they ALWAYS get back to me the SAME day or the day after. I have asked them about adding certain features, and sometimes they inform me that it wouldn't work, but I Know for a fact that they have added things I asked for. And other times they have said they would consider it for a farther out update. The point is, they DO listen to the community, but they can't just add a special feature for you. Instead they are adding features that will benefit everybody and maybe when some of the main features are done they will add other things. I have always been impressed with the promptness and quality of their responses...far better than any other developer or company I have contacted!

Thecheater887

It wouldn't be just for me, ands I do feel like I am not explaining things properly.

They do listen, but any time I have a game-changing suggestion, it gets shot down. Health bar upgrades? We can do that ((Yay! :D)). ABS, Points, and a couple of other suggestions I magically can't find right now? Nope. Not logical, too much work, or otherwise. I understand if it's too much cost, or work, and I understand you have two entire coders, but at some point you have to move on from smaller features onto bigger ones, ones that do change the game, not just minor improvements.

Empty objects need to be parsed for collisions, and physics. Points would not need either, and Areas only collisions.

My biggest issue is that collisions and move To's don't detect or react when object A is on layer 1, and B on layer 3, for example.

The hard coded system for areas is more or less what I needed. I draw a box on the UI, and hyperPad does the coordinate bounds. I can then check objects against it.

Points need to be able to be used for object movement, object spawning, be able to modify objects differently as they pass by, as well as camera movement and rotation. Your camera rotation is still buggy, and we can't change the FoV. FoV isn't the biggest issue, but it could help.

Unfortunately, when you build for everyone, sacrificing all, there isn't baseline examples for them, so we are expected to create AI, Matchagainst, mathematics, overloads, etc from scratch, and that gets messy and unfollowable, FAST. Does it work for a generic game? Yes. Jump, shoot, move, die. But what happens when you need to match three against each other? Detect who's in first place? Have a fancy loading animation? Randomly generate a level using certain enemies and objects, and make it look like it was preset? God knows I can think of a good example now of all times.

You have to create the logic from scratch, and it gets laggy, if it's even possible.

You can do a lot on HyperPad easily, and that's what many enjoy, but no amazing product comes through a night of coding and 500 behaviors. You're just lacking that extra shine to make every project amazing, rather than every one the same, a test, or "Look at this rock". That could help with documentation, but it would also be nice if you could add a wiki for extra information that the users can edit, the users can read, and when needed, a behavior to make it a whole lot easier, especially overdue ones.

Nintendo just does not care. Smaller developers usually go solo, or don't have time, but you are correct, you try to treat humans like, well, humans, but as you can see, when those humans speak two different languages, it won't end well.

Another truth of the matter is that you haven't told me how I can prove it makes sense, or rather what I can do, so I have no way of knowing what I can do, nor will I accept "it won't work" without a reason.

I do want to have a discussion, but I feel we aren't hearing each other, and you know how my explaining works: it doesn't.

I have a suggestion, you don't like it, we go around in circles.
I feel it would be better if
I have a suggestion, you tell me why you don't like it, or it won't work, or how I can prove it will, I try, and if I fail, I fail, if I succeed, then we can go from there.

I don't expect all of my thoughts to "Oh my gawd amazing add it to this list right naw!", but I do expect to know why they don't make it, so I can have a chance to im, or prove them so they can, if I need it that badly, like this, for instance.

Murtaza

Ok I think I figured out what you actually want.

In a simplified example, you want to check collisions between objects (or points) on different layers.
I can see the need for this :)

The issue with your explanations is you provide information overload. Try to keep it simple, and ignore the technical mumbo jumbo. We get you're a smart guy, just pretend we're not, and explain it like we're 5.

We'll look into a solution that does this, and I'm sure we can come up with something you will be happy with.

Thecheater887

Thanks! I'm sure whatever solution it is will be a start :D