Builder game src code

Page: 1 2
Dec 17 2008, 3:44 am
In response to Tiberath
I know all about modular programming. While my little code snippet itself would be mostly stand alone, it's incredibly hard to test its functionality without the ability to actually build stuff and then save it, reload the map, and check if it works.

So yes, I need the building system. I'm not going to create my own building and map saving and loading system AND import a whole truckload of icons and the like just for the sake of testing an add-on.
Dec 17 2008, 3:52 am
In response to CaptFalcon33035
CaptFalcon33035 wrote:
Everyone I know thinks 3.5 is frustrating compared to 4.0, and developing for 4.0 is no different than developing for 3.5, save for that 4.0 has quite a bit more functionality (awesome functionality, by the way) that isn't exactly required to get anything running.

Also, you are the last one on BYOND using 3.5.

Not by a long shot. I know quite a few people who still dislike BYOND 4.0 and several who got fairly upset when I mentioned possibly upgrading my game to it.

I have both versions of BYOND on my computer, and I honestly still prefer 3.5. Like I said, the issues with the macros, the blurring of maps and icons and the fact that a lot of new games don't have a proper interface set (thus meaning I have to basically setup my own one) are some of the reasons.

But look, and I'll say this to the other guys as well, I started this thread to ask about builder game source codes. I have no intention of holding a 3.5 vs 4.0 argument in here as well. If you want to discuss it, maybe someone can post a new thread about it. Either way, I've got what I need from here so I'll stop posting after this, unless there are questions related to my original post.
Dec 17 2008, 3:56 am
In response to Masterdan
Masterdan wrote:
epic failure of a post. 3.5 may have been more stable than 4.0 during the beta builds and maybe even the first couple of non-beta builds, but to say that 3.5 is more stable than the current 4.0 builds shows that you have absolutely no real understanding of the updates made in 4.0

-Repairing the flaws that caused almost guaranteed eventual server lockdown, ie loginscreen bug, ie background processes not terminating properly.

-Fixing the problem with overlays in which the more use of overlays your game employed the faster the game would eventually completly break and run out of overlays completly, this was a huge problem for any game that was graphically intensive and completly hamstringed developers in what they could do. (see NarutoGOA, DBO2(according to kobata), MegamanNT:The navi wars)

-Interfaces, hello?, do you not see the benefit to a more flexible macro system and the ability to actually tailor the games interface to the way its played?

-Alpha values in icons. This graphical jump has moved BYONDs potential for a 2D game up so freaking far.

+Hundreds of random bugs and problems that have been addressed since 4.0s release.

3.5 has absolutely NO discernible benefit over 4.0, find me one. One feature or more stable aspect and ill gladly debunk it for you. I cannot explain to you how much has improved for developers since 3.5 wrapped up, I cant even start. It isnt even a matter of opinion, you can do anything you could do in 3.5 in 4.0, so it isnt really something you can argue is a preference difference, 4.0 is more features and better stability. Please though, defend your argument.

What issues exist? Do you know how annoying such a vague statement must be for Tom and LummoxJr?

As I said in the other message, I don't intend on starting an argument over the pros and cons of the two BYOND versions on here. I don't mind stating my opinion in a new thread, but I started this thread for the simple purpose of getting some builder game source code, and now I have it.

As such, I don't intend on discussing the different BYOND versions any further in here. If you or someone else wants to make a new thread about it, go right ahead. Until then though, I'm going to leave things here.
Dec 17 2008, 4:05 am
In response to Perpetr8r the Perpetu8r
Perpetr8r the Perpetu8r wrote:
I have both versions of BYOND on my computer, and I honestly still prefer 3.5. Like I said, the issues with the macros, the blurring of maps and icons and the fact that a lot of new games don't have a proper interface set (thus meaning I have to basically setup my own one) are some of the reasons.

You're wrong in every one of those categories. Perhaps it's not 4.0, but rather your impatience. There are no issues with the macros. The blurring of the map can be fixed via the default interface, and alas! there IS a proper default interface.
Dec 17 2008, 5:49 am
In response to Perpetr8r the Perpetu8r
You're complaining about a bug that you couldn't be bothered to report? Good gads man, how can we fix the bug if you won't report it? It's even entirely possible the issue is already fixed, since a number of macro-related issues have already been addressed.

If you're aware of an issue with 4.0, I encourage you to test it out thoroughly, create a small demo project if need be that demonstrates the bug, and post about it in Bug Reports.

Lummox JR
Dec 17 2008, 6:03 am
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
You're complaining about a bug that you couldn't be bothered to report? Good gads man, how can we fix the bug if you won't report it? It's even entirely possible the issue is already fixed, since a number of macro-related issues have already been addressed.

If you're aware of an issue with 4.0, I encourage you to test it out thoroughly, create a small demo project if need be that demonstrates the bug, and post about it in Bug Reports.

Lummox JR

Bah, I'm not trying to complain about it! This thread was started about something entirely different, and people wanted info on why I wanted to use 3.5 and not 4.0...

As for the macro issue, it's possible that it's because I'm using a laptop to run BYOND. I don't know how it works exactly, but I had macro issues back in 3.5 too. For example, I could code macros into my games, but they never worked, ever (and I know it wasn't because of the code - even tested and working code would not work). Only macros that worked were the ones I set manually through dreamseeker.

With 4.0 I have a different issue, but it's macros all the same, so I have my suspicions that the two are linked. Either way, I didn't start this thread to complain about 4.0 and I only said something because people started freaking out about me asking for something in 3.5 format.

And yeah, to be honest, that one issue is probably the biggest reason why I'm not a fan of 4.0, but as long as 3.5 works the way it does, I'm happy. Most of the new features don't really matter to me much, and some of them complicate things more than I would like, so why upgrade?

If I'm happy as is, I might as well just leave things be.

EDIT: Oh, and it's definitely not fixed. I still have to press the macro button combination several times to get it to work once.
Dec 17 2008, 6:08 am
In response to Perpetr8r the Perpetu8r
Perpetr8r the Perpetu8r wrote:
I have both versions of BYOND on my computer, and I honestly still prefer 3.5. Like I said, the issues with the macros, the blurring of maps and icons and the fact that a lot of new games don't have a proper interface set (thus meaning I have to basically setup my own one) are some of the reasons.

If there are any issues left with the macros you need to report them. Other macro issues, perhaps the same ones you're aware of, have already been fixed. Map blurriness is something you can control completely through your interface, and even in the default interface, so that isn't even a valid criticism. And I'm not even sure what you mean about a lot of games not having a proper interface, since most of the games I've seen either use the default or use a very well-developed interface.

I realize this is not the topic you originally embarked on, but the excuses you've given for clinging to 3.5 are incredibly thin, in some cases outright incorrect, and you need to reexamine them. It isn't remotely an XP-vs.-Vista situation; but having made that analogy, it's coloring the way you view the whole thing. Where Vista broke compatibility with older apps, Microsoft had no intention of fixing it; we regarded almost every significant change from 3.5's behavior as a bug, and have fixed most if not all of those issues.

Lummox JR
Dec 17 2008, 6:30 am
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:

If there are any issues left with the macros you need to report them. Other macro issues, perhaps the same ones you're aware of, have already been fixed. Map blurriness is something you can control completely through your interface, and even in the default interface, so that isn't even a valid criticism. And I'm not even sure what you mean about a lot of games not having a proper interface, since most of the games I've seen either use the default or use a very well-developed interface.

I realize this is not the topic you originally embarked on, but the excuses you've given for clinging to 3.5 are incredibly thin, in some cases outright incorrect, and you need to reexamine them. It isn't remotely an XP-vs.-Vista situation; but having made that analogy, it's coloring the way you view the whole thing. Where Vista broke compatibility with older apps, Microsoft had no intention of fixing it; we regarded almost every significant change from 3.5's behavior as a bug, and have fixed most if not all of those issues.

Lummox JR

Well, I feel that I do have valid points, and I am willing to expand on my opinions so that you may be able to understand my point of view better. However, doing so in here would likely turn this thread into a debate, more so than it is already.

I do want to say though that you're delving too deeply into my analogy. I stated that as a more or less surface comparison of the two. Basically, Vista improved upon a lot of things that people didn't like about XP; However, it changed some of the things that people DID like, and came along with a lot of new bugs and issues.

Surely you can understand how the comparison between 3.5 and 4.0 would work in that sense. When the beta was first released, I (and I know I wasn't the only one who did this) downloaded it and gave it a try - but then quickly switched back to 3.5. While most of problems that 4.0 had at the time may have been fixed out by now, my point still stands - 3.5 (much like XP) was more reliable and preferable to the newer version at that point.

Even now some people still prefer the older version (as with XP versus Vista), and that's become more of a personal-circumstances-based choice than anything else.

So yeah, the basic point here is that many people weren't too impressed with Vista (and I'ma go out on a limb here and say 4.0 as well) in the beginning. Even now that things have improved, you could say there are those who are not willing to let go of some of the things they like about the older versions for the perks the new versions offer.

I actually like a lot of the features 4.0 offers, but still, it's got a ways to go before I'm content enough to want to switch to it permanently.

Anyway yeah, I won't go into the other stuff because of the aforementioned reasons, but I do have things to say on those comments too. Maybe I'll make a post on my hub page about it or something.
Dec 17 2008, 6:41 am
Okies, let's see. I'm gonna have to lock this thread to avoid it REALLY spiralling off. Hopefully you've got enough of an answer to be exploring some builder code solutions that would prove good test harnesses for this system you've developed. If you don't, my apologies, but as you can see this thread is soon to get daft.

Please post any bugs you have against the mainline 4.0 suite in bug reports, this is stuff that I'm sure the developers would love test-cases for.

As for 3.5 vs 4.0 discussions, you are welcome to make a thread in Design Philosophy discussing the design and development merits of these two versions. I'd prefer a neutral and open ended starting post if someone really wants to discuss this. Last thing I want is to end up trimming posts off that too.

Cheers.
Page: 1 2