Posts by Sam_Dillard

Hello, I was wondering... is there no way to make objects with pre-defined shapes in the physics engine? In Box2d of 2.0, you could set up custom polygons via coordinate strings, and there seems to be no way to do this now...

Hi y'all, long time Click dev here, just wanted to post about my new album on Kickstarter, Eternity Rising:
Please login to see this link.

Been a long time coming after doing music for other people's games for the past 10+ years, and hopefully this will get the ball rolling as I get back into developing games myself again.

If you can, please check it out, I'm not too terribly experienced with self-promotion so if you guys could help spread the word that would be awesome and you have my undying thanks!

-Sam

Thank you Marv, I appreciate it!

Had to re-install MMF2, when I try to re-download the box2d extension however the links (Please login to see this link.) no longer work... anyone know where I can get the box2d_2.0.mfx now? Thanks

Okie doke, I didn't know if it was related to the display or not, I also tried using stars and even simple 4-sided polygons and it still slows down, so I guess the number of vertices drawn doesn't seem to matter. Thanks for taking a look though

(Note) The slowdown also happens when the object is invisible

Sure thing, I mean overall it is fast in other tests, but in this case it really grinds to a halt. On my machine, which is fairly decent- Core 2 Quad/Win7/Good GFX Card, I get to only about 12 objects before the framerate starts to fall apart dramatically

Please login to see this link.

Great extension, even better than Overlay, which is saying something. I noticed something though...

Just in a test, I was drawing ellipses at active objects (to simulate a simple vision radius) and at only 12-15 objects it began to slow down tremendously. The size of the circle also seems to make a difference too, the bigger the circle, the worse the slowdown.

I recall being able to do this with Overlay and it didn't slow down nearly as quickly. Am I doing something wrong, or is the Surface extension just not as optimized for drawing maybe?

Maximizing the window is the same as windowed mode for D3D9- fps fluctuates between 50-60fps (with vsync). D3D8 remains consistent 60fps the whole time. I am using Windows 7 64bit, if that makes any difference. It seems that when using my old Vista computer, this problem never happened. So I don't know if it is due to the OS, or perhaps the latest version of hwa...?

Yeah I know how v-sync works, but the screen is at 60hz and vsync with D3D8 works normally, D3D9 however loses 10fps in windowed mode, but not in fullscreen mode.

Without v-sync D3D9 goes back to 60. So... (Windowed+vsync)D3D8=60fps, >>D3D9=50fps
(Fullscreen+vsync)D3D8=60fps, D3D9=60fps
Without v-sync everything is 60fps...

Okay so... In windowed mode, Direct3D 8 + vsync = 60fps (the correct framerate in this case). Direct3D 9 + vsync drops to 50fps... however in fullscreen mode goes up to 60fps...

Am I missing something here? Yes all drivers are current and etc. I don't understand why D3D8 has constant framerate but D3D9 has problems in windowed mode but none in fullscreen... Strange.

So uh, are the lights not working/implemented or am I missing something? I cannot seem to get any lights to work, everything is just flat illuminated

Yes... documentation... sweet documentation...

Anyways, I'm thinking a diablo-style game might be best for this. If possible. I'll come up with some simple character models to get started with. Still fiddling around blindly trying to figure these extensions out.

I can figure them out, but it would take time away from doing graphics work and etc. It would be nice if there was some documentation with them...

Since I have no idea how to work these new extensions, I will come up with a quick design doc and concept to post, and handle the graphics & sound primarily.

Not sure if it's been mentioned, but when using:

"Negate: object A overlapping object B

If object B doesn't exist, the condition triggers false instead of true.

Hello, I was just wondering if the "spread alterable value" function could be re-designed to retain the current spread order, instead of starting from the newest object and re-shuffling the values of all other objects

Hmm... I think there is a bug. When you have an "object A not overlapping object B" condition, and object B does not exist, then the condition is false.

I assume this has something to do with the 'negate' property, since I guess it checks for the object to exist, then applies the negate.

Simple test:

<Conditon> Active Object A (NOT/NEGATED) overlapping Active Object B

<Action> set Active Object A to x/ymouse

if active object B is destroyed/not present, then the condition fails... even though it should be true. Not sure if this is a hwa-exclusive bug or not

Crashes when trying to start a server within mmf. Also crashes when trying to connect to the exe server using localhost