At 1/17/05 05:54 PM, The_Protector wrote:
At 1/17/05 01:02 PM, The_Mercenary wrote:
your only problem is that there is a much simpler jump code out there. And I have a simple code thats alot shorter than yours that'll work easily
say it ! say it !
Trust me, I've seen simpler engines. There are two out there:
One just has a movieclip called ground, and that stops the character from falling. Only problem is, you can have only one platform, so that's useless.
The second has one movieclip, with every block in it. If you want to use this, fine by me, but I don't recommend it. If you ever see an engine like this, it'll always have a few blocks placed in a simple manner. That's all it can handle. The problem is that some stupid scripters out there wrote the single-clip code because it was easy, and didn't realize how utterly useless it was when put to the test. The blocks can't stop you from moving through them left or right most of the time. And small blocks? The character falls through like they don't exist.
The reason I like my engine is because it can be used effectively. It went through rigorous testing; I used randomly sized blocks over and over. Even when I was sure it was working, I kept testing. Other then that, the blocks in my engine can be customized to do different things, such as be fake, be moving, be breakable, etc...
Sure the code is confusing. But hey, it's a quality engine that can be used to make quality games. I told you, if you have problems, IM me and I'll help fix them.
As for you, The_Mercenary, why don't you post the code? I want to see it. I'll test it my way, and see if it can handle the complex situations that occur in almost every platformer.
I'm getting so sick of people telling me their engines are better then mine, and then giving me some stupid bug-ridden piece of work.
{{{{{ ANGER }}}}}
Anyone else reading this, I apologize... I'm in a crappy mood, I'm pretty angry. And if anyone else says they have a better engine, post it before you brag about it.
-Rystic