AGS. What would be cool... Random Questions...

[theatrx]

I looked and I couldn't find it.  Chris is gonna be pissed. 

I only had two things.

More timers and

More regions.  That's it!

There are modules that accomodate both of these but it would be nice if it were actually in AGS.  Modules are cool but it means you have to learn more stuff.

Chris is brilliant already!  Everything is there.  I just need more of it.

He's accomodated 50 characters in the same room.  Cool.  I can deal with 25 without going nuts.  Actually, I did go nuts at 25!  Strazer has a great module though.  I'm still too stupid though for that one!!!

More Regions on the other hand would be great since it would allow for more advanced puzzles.

I'm still having a problem with scripting between  the old and the new... sometimes cCharacter works and sometime oName works better.  Character actually works better than Object.  It allows for more options.
Options are good.

What's the difference between c* Animate and c*Move?  Sometimes it works great and sometimes it doesn't.

I had a really hard problem with o* getting to work like I wanted.  I changed all the o*'s to c*'s and everything worked perfectly.  So, o*'s don't work like c*'s?  I would think they would.  Especially when it came to "is 'I can't remember' is bumping into..."

C's are way better than O's. 

I asked about a hybrid Char that had all the ability of a GUI, a Char, and an Object... I know this is a hard one.  It's just that sometimes you get into a situation that you wish the 'thing' (the hybrid thing) had all the capability that you know is possible  but doesn't yet exist.

I know this is REALLY WIERD... Is it possible to have "If the player does NOT have an Inventory  Item if something else for that matter?" Could "Not and Had" be part of the equation?  This may seem stupid and could be handled by a SetGraphicVariable  or Get GraphicVariable but it would make some things work much better.   

I don't get the impression that scripting is all that compatible yet.  Sometimes a number is more important than a name.  Sometimes the reverse.  Not that I'm complaining.  Chris has done extraordinary work turning this into a script based complex.  I guess it's a work in progress.

I guess the next question is... Does Chris have a life after AGS?

My next question is "How much would it cost to have a 'real' AGS website without the AmericanGirlScouts attached?  I'd be interested in that project.

I think Chris is important.  I think everyone involved with AGS is important.
It would be nice to have a site that was simply AGS.

I've updated my site to accomodate what I do.  It might be worthwhile to upgrade it more to accomodate a site for people to upload stuff free.

I love AGS.  I love the creativity.  Chris is the bong.  I think I want to help.

Steve


 

[monkey0506]

More timers and

There are modules that accomodate both of these but it would be nice if it were actually in AGS.  Modules are cool but it means you have to learn more stuff.

Sure, support for more timers in AGS would be nice. But I can't really see a reason for it to be very high priority. If you're willing to use a module, I would be willing to go into detailed explanation on how to use my Timer module. If you're interested PM me.

More Regions on the other hand would be great since it would allow for more advanced puzzles.

If you really needed more it could be done with some advanced scripting. But support for more would be better for those less familiar with AGS scripting. I think (unverified information!) one of the major problems with this is the way that Hotspots/Regions/Walkable Areas/Walkbehinds are currently implemented. All of these are currently implemented as bitmaps which would explain the limited number of colors as well as things like no overlapping areas. IMO it would be nice to see this changed, but it would take a lot of work on Chris's part (as a matter of fact, right now while he's working specifically on the editor might be the best time to inquire for this type of thing, but I wouldn't get your hopes too high as I think someone already brought this up).

I'm still having a problem with scripting between  the old and the new... sometimes cCharacter works and sometime oName works better.  Character actually works better than Object.  It allows for more options.
Options are good.

Objects and Characters are designed to support different functions; they aren't the same thing. Objects are designed to be interactable items contained within only one room. Characters are supposed to be, oh my, characters in the game. There are certain instances in which using one to emulate the other works better than using the one designed to serve that function, but they are designed the way they are on purpose.

What's the difference between c* Animate and c*Move?  Sometimes it works great and sometimes it doesn't.

Character.Animate is a function to make the character animate. Such as, if you want the player character to run the animation where he picks his nose and then flings the booger on the wall, you could use player.Animate to run the animation. Character.Walk[Straight] however is intended for actually making the character move across the screen. So you would use Character.Animate to make the character do something where he's already standing at (say, do a little dance), but you would use Character.Walk or Character.WalkStraight to make the character walk across the screen (Object.Move is the related function for moving Objects across screen, Object.Animate works the same as Character.Animate, only on an object, not a character).

I had a really hard problem with o* getting to work like I wanted.  I changed all the o*'s to c*'s and everything worked perfectly.  So, o*'s don't work like c*'s?  I would think they would.  Especially when it came to "is 'I can't remember' is bumping into..."

C's are way better than O's.

Again, they're not intended to serve the same purpose. There are instances (again) where one can better serve in the other's place, but they're intended to serve different functions.

I asked about a hybrid Char that had all the ability of a GUI, a Char, and an Object... I know this is a hard one.  It's just that sometimes you get into a situation that you wish the 'thing' (the hybrid thing) had all the capability that you know is possible  but doesn't yet exist.

I can't really think of an instance in which I would need such a hybrid "thing". For the most part a Character can do everything an Object can do. They're not intended for the same purpose, but you could probably use a Character to emulate most everything an Object can do. But as for the GUI part? I can't imagine I'd ever need to have a Character talking to me and then suddenly tell me to start pushing buttons on his shirt to save the game.... :o

I know this is REALLY WIERD... Is it possible to have "If the player does NOT have an Inventory  Item if something else for that matter?"

Code: ags

if (player.InventoryQuantity[iKey.ID] == 0) Display("Player does not have any keys!");

Like that?

Could "Not and Had" be part of the equation?  This may seem stupid and could be handled by a SetGraphicVariable  or Get GraphicVariable but it would make some things work much better.

Are you wanting to check if the player has EVER had the item at any point in the game? For that you would need to use a variable (not necessarily a graphical variable, but just any variable). But you could check if the player doesn't have it using the code above.

I don't get the impression that scripting is all that compatible yet.  Sometimes a number is more important than a name.  Sometimes the reverse.  Not that I'm complaining.  Chris has done extraordinary work turning this into a script based complex.  I guess it's a work in progress.

Sometimes it's more important to use a number to index something than using a name...does that mean the scripting language is inconsistent? Would it be better to use a less conventional mean simply to make sure everything matched up nicely? IMO the language is pretty consistent as-is. There are instances where numbers are used instead of names, but for most of those it wouldn't make sense to give them a name, or it would just be more of an issue to try and index them by name. For the rest, there's modules!

I guess the next question is... Does Chris have a life after AGS?

What the hell do you mean after AGS?

My next question is "How much would it cost to have a 'real' AGS website without the AmericanGirlScouts attached?  I'd be interested in that project.

So this isn't a real website? The AmericanGirlScouts.org domain is hosted on a server owned by several of the forum members. The reason for the domain is the history behind it. If you don't know the history, educate yourself! Besides, you don't see the American Girl Scouts bit anyway. You see BigBlueCup.com here on the forums. But why isn't it a real website as you put it?

I think Chris is important.  I think everyone involved with AGS is important.
It would be nice to have a site that was simply AGS.

And this is....?

I've updated my site to accomodate what I do.  It might be worthwhile to upgrade it more to accomodate a site for people to upload stuff free.

Providing free hosting space is always appreciated.

I love AGS.  I love Chris.

Yes, well get in line. I registered here nearly two years before you. I get him way before you do. 8)