Messages

Yeah! Or perhaps the date *was* correct for barefoot because he was replying from the past.

Sparky.

Thanks guys. We're already using workarounds but it would be nice to make use of official support.
Cheers,
Sparky.

I would love to see a new writable property for hotspots that allow us to change their description properties during runtime.
I could have sworn this was already a well implemented feature but unfortunately for me, I was misinformed.

How I see it working is like so:

Code: ags

hDoor.SetDescription("locked door");

or perhaps even,

Code: ags

hDoor.SetDescription = "locked door";

Cheers,
Sparky.

[Suggestion:]

Suggestion:
To avoid simpler users from confusing this with a bug,

In AGS 3.3, I would like to see better handling of mouse modes. Currently they are hard coded and we have to work around them by renaming the events in the events pane AND the script in order to customize the naming conventions. In our game, our events don't automatically line up well at all between the events in the events pane and the script.

Event: Open = PickUp() function for example

Cheers,
Sparky.

As am I, CJ.

With respect, I've tried everything to get Alpha working properly in the case described.

Sparky.

A few minor requests of mine, I hope I don't re-request too much

- change hotspot names at runtime
- set /change custom properties at runtime

Lol, Abstauber! I only just re-requested those things myself two nights ago!
http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=36284.msg544464#msg544464

We ARE a repetitive lot! Good to see most of us are on the same line of thinking though. It seems there are just some areas of AGS that we're all really seeking improvement on.
Sparky.

Yep. Same here. Very frustrating. :'(
Is this issue we're having also related to the fact that alpha-blended inventory icons don't work over a GUI with a background? The alpha channel, it seems, is completely discarded.

We're using PNGs too.

Sparky.

Already suggested 'somewhere' but...

Properties that are editable during runtime.
We could then customize objects/hotspots/classes/etc during gameplay. Very cool.

Cheers,
Sparky.

Nice one Dave!!

How cool is AGS 3x! 8)

Sparky.

Hehehe.

We use SVN on our two projects.
http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/

Sparky.

Yeah like I said before it's a sticky area. I upgraded to the newer AGS 2.8 as soon as my 2.72 project completed. Problem solved.
It may not be the same for everyone but I do believe that if your developing a project, it's more than practical to stick with the one engine generation you chose to start with.
But alas... Life isn't fair. SO, we'll have to see. 8)

Sparky.

Well put Garage.
My gut feeling is that AGS will continue to grow in the areas we're all hoping for. Chris is just magic like that.

Sparks.

[Edit:]

Absolutely. These are all just suggestions here. Nobody's making any demands or decisions for Chris.
'Opting' for the idea was just another way of saying "I stand by Alan's original suggestion", Calin. My choice for words is sometimes a bit mixed up. Sorry for the confusion chief.

Edit: Producing a 3rd party plug-in to allow backwards compatibility to me sounds like a better way of carrying the current official support across into future versions.

Sparky.

Your between two topics Miez buddy.

Basically Calin, Alan, Dualnames and myself agree that AGS 2x should stand on its own allowing for AGS 3x to be swept of features that relate to 2x backwards compatibility (being able to use AGS 3 to import older games).
Basically, right now there's a huge bunch of 'engine' code (not to be confused with syntax) that tells AGS 3x how to import a 2x game. We're opting for AGS 3x to have this unnecessary feature removed. It doesn't really make sense anymore. Most of us now have a clear handle on the aging differences 2x has from the newer 3x version. If there are still users wanting to convert their 2x project to the new 3x format, then ultimately AGS 3.2 could be the last version able to do this and it could be hosted among the version numbers (with notes) on the main website as suggested before.

I hope that makes more sense.

Cheers,
Sparky.

Lol. Well to clarify, by clutter free, I mean obsolete 2x features. The suggestions I make every now and then are just basic ideas I have that I expect have no higher priority than anyone else's.

Anyway, I'm with you here. I feel that this is a necessary change. Does anyone else agree or feel the same way about CJ perhaps eventually removing backwards compatibility from AGS 3x ?

Cheers,
Sparky.

BTW Calin, how come you look ten in your avatar. You remind me of the young Angel from X-Men III.

And where's this PM you said you were sending me, AC? You master of mystery, you...

I think Darth Mandarb stole it!

I agree with Alan.. although I phrase my agreement in a less aggressive fashion.

Well, aggressive phrase or not, I agree with this idea. The sooner AGS 3x can stand on its own 'blue saucer' the better.

Have either of you thought there might be other (possibly commercial-related) reasons to retain compatibility?

I have actually yes. And I think that it is most important that there be a regular link to previous AGS releases on the main website. It was nearly impossible to find 2.6 and I didn't find it here.

To be fair to all, when a commercial production starts here at my studio, like many others, we commit to a version of UE3/AGS/Unity and stick with it so that we avoid having to re-write or re-work anything significant. The same commercial practices would or really should apply with other commercial studios.

To get back on point (A), I'll be completely honest with you guys, AGS deserves a spring clean. And if I were a betting man, which I am, I'd say Chris grows lethargic of supporting a near-giant backlog of features and perhaps hopes that the majority of us can support the idea of a lighter, clutter-free AGS soon.

Of course, the downside here is that it may be a fair slog to pull out obsolete 2x features and still keep 3x features working, but really in the long run, the benefits are there staring us in the face.

I assure you I certainly don't expect this to be an easy topic for everybody reach a consensus on, but the topic does deserve the opportunity for us to discuss our honest views about it. Perhaps there should be an open, 'reasonable' discussion on what 2x features the community believes belong under the 3x title and what 2x features need to be recorded in the history books.

In any case... this effort and its outcomes is entirely up to your discretion CJ, but I hope you do see where Calin, Alan and I are coming from.

Cheers,
Sparky.

I'm a hetrosapian.

How dare you blaspheme my name!
Paul means "small"....not bulburously creepy FATASS!!!!

Ew.

Btw, Nice idea. Game looks cool!