A workaround suggestion for qualifiers & global events

Back in the Games Factory,or the second gen of Clickteam products, this was a common place feature. It is not actually an extra feature people are asking for, rather one that was effectively removed without much warning from "Higher" versions of the Click platform. Instead of having separate global events and behaviours, you had groups you could tick a box, and the events would be global. I don't remember there being any restrictions on this in terms of qualifiers, and I made several short games this way.

I don't really know why MMF has this limitation, but the way people "get around it" aside from using level editors seems to be mostly down to copying and pasting code, either from object to object in terms of behaviour or frame to frame.

The thing is, there's no reason why the old "Global Events" couldn't be restored. Essentially what you can view it as doing, is copy and pasting the same event groups again and again, for every frame, but automatically. It may even be possible just to mess with the pointers so all frame events are pointed to the same frame's code(within a certain group, anyway). If this works - there's no reason why this couldn't be done internally and automatically. There is nothing magical about clicking and dragging, it's all just calling internal functions - so it would take a very short amount of time to implement a function that emulated the 2nd Gen way of doing this. It may cause some issues that are already existent with global objects - but that's already going to happen with copy/pasting.

I can't see any reason why this couldn't be put in the next version and it would effectively fix this problem for most people and cut down on a lot of waste. I don't think it should be assumed this can't be done, again I don't think enough importance has been assigned to it because most of the people for whom this was an issue gave up long ago and moved on, but a lot of people still know MMF best and could be tempted back with a simple fix like this.

I'd ask people to at least not make excuses why this "shouldn't" be done or why it's not important - it is important to some people and would benefit many users of the software even if they haven't thought of it yet. Please also understand that if it's possible to make "global" code by manually copy/pasting it's possible to do this internally/automatically.

Isn't this just a continuation from the old thread? If you're looking for solutions you can get use now, then it's either global objects with behaviours, or the hacky solution ASD found out (which I linked to in the last thread). If you're not looking for solutions and this is just a commentary, I think François gave you an answer, also in the last thread.

Well, the last thread was nuked before i read the end of it. I don't like the solutions presented thus far as they seem inferior to what we had back in the original TGF.

I don't see why this solution couldn't be implemented. It shouldn't always be up to the users to work around the software when an earlier version was easier in some way.

Yes, I agree as well. I've also been frustrated by the program's limitations, but most of the things I'd like to see remedied won't be fixed until MMF3. Once you understand that's the deal, which is not a very good one, you have to start finding workarounds to achieve what you want. It's an unfortunate situation but, in my view, if you want something to work, it doesn't matter how you get it working.

Roseweave,

In case you missed it the first time:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Francois

Sorry, I only discovered this thread now.
Alllowing qualifiers in global and local event would imply a lot of work, because there are some nasty combinations of qualifiers and code that simply do not work.
This is a lot a work, and it will be integrated into MMF3. (as well as customisable qualifiers) So please be patient.

---

This is from Francois himself, I think if you can now accept this and maybe use this thread to conjure a constructive solution either using workarounds or the behaviour/global event method.

Also, feel free to visit the Open Community Forum further down to discuss MMF3 and possible features.

Imagine you have a qualifier in frame 1 for an active object. Imagine you have a qualifier in frame 2 for an edit box object.
Using this qualifier in global event? Which one to use?
I do not say it is not possible, I say it is a lot of work to make the process fool proof, with modifications in the editor's core routines.

While I'm not entirely happy with the lack of global qualifier support myself, I support the idea of leaving it out until it's bug free. Back in MMF 1.5, the program was always at risk of crashing at the worst possible time for me, and a lot of times this was caused by modifying global events with qualifiers.

I just use the Copy-Paste method at the moment. To help speed up the process, I make sure that my "Global" events are all contained in a single group at the top of each frame's event editor, so that all I have to do is flip through the frames while cutting and pasting. If I put some music on, I'm usually done after 1-2 songs.

Ideally, if you plan to develop a HUGE game that could consist of many frames you should be gearing your development towards a 'one-frame' engine. This way you get complete control, can input/output variables/commands/additional settings all into one frame.

This way, any updates that are needed to the game engine are only needed for one frame and one frame only, not 265+ frames or whatever your game may hold.

Alternatively, if you don't wish to pursue the 'one-frame' scenario, then you should make use of global events and behaviours. You can code up all the behaviours for that object and just drag n drop it into every frame it's required, no additional coding! Again, if you want to work with 'groups' of objects, then just integrate the ForEach object in with the behaviours and start grouping your objects together using IDs(Alterable Value) or a 'String' to define which group it belongs to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Francois

Imagine you have a qualifier in frame 1 for an active object. Imagine you have a qualifier in frame 2 for an edit box object.
Using this qualifier in global event? Which one to use?
I do not say it is not possible, I say it is a lot of work to make the process fool proof, with modifications in the editor's core routines.

---

But isn't this the same problem as when you manually copy/paste anyway?

You just have to be careful to keep qualifiers to objects of the same type. I don't think there's anything wrong with a potential crash scenario if the end user understands what they're doing wrong. It would be far better to have this functionality than not.

Again this functionality was stripped from previous versions of the product. I don't see why I should have to pay for new software to put it back in, it doesn't make me very confidence that MMF3 will be worth purchasing in it's own right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strife

While I'm not entirely happy with the lack of global qualifier support myself, I support the idea of leaving it out until it's bug free. Back in MMF 1.5, the program was always at risk of crashing at the worst possible time for me, and a lot of times this was caused by modifying global events with qualifiers.

I just use the Copy-Paste method at the moment. To help speed up the process, I make sure that my "Global" events are all contained in a single group at the top of each frame's event editor, so that all I have to do is flip through the frames while cutting and pasting. If I put some music on, I'm usually done after 1-2 songs.

---

There's no reason why MMF can't do this for you automatically though. Having to update the game every time I make a minor change is frustrating, as I may have many different level-specific objects for example to check the jumping physics against.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danny

Alternatively, if you don't wish to pursue the 'one-frame' scenario, then you should make use of global events and behaviours. You can code up all the behaviours for that object and just drag n drop it into every frame it's required, no additional coding! Again, if you want to work with 'groups' of objects, then just integrate the ForEach object in with the behaviours and start grouping your objects together using IDs(Alterable Value) or a 'String' to define which group it belongs to.

---

I wasn't aware MMF had this functionality as this was one of the things I tried "back in the day". I'll have to look into this. I'm unsure as to why nobody's suggested this until now.

Also would it be possible for a third party plug-in to have similar functionality?

Hey Roseweave,

You can code behaviours into every type of object, literally. It's a relatively simple process to do, I can try and whip something up in an MFA for you to look at but it'll be sometime before Sunday or on Sunday if nobody beats me to it.

Alternatively, if you go down to the File Archive section here there is a 'widget' section, all widgets are behaviour coded so you'll be able to see all the code inside that object and just drag it to a new frame and it'll instantly work there too!

It's not the behaviours I'm worried about, it was the suggestion regarding using alterable strings instead of groups, and picking objects by that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danny

Ideally, if you plan to develop a HUGE game that could consist of many frames you should be gearing your development towards a 'one-frame' engine. This way you get complete control, can input/output variables/commands/additional settings all into one frame.

This way, any updates that are needed to the game engine are only needed for one frame and one frame only, not 265+ frames or whatever your game may hold.

Alternatively, if you don't wish to pursue the 'one-frame' scenario, then you should make use of global events and behaviours. You can code up all the behaviours for that object and just drag n drop it into every frame it's required, no additional coding! Again, if you want to work with 'groups' of objects, then just integrate the ForEach object in with the behaviours and start grouping your objects together using IDs(Alterable Value) or a 'String' to define which group it belongs to.

---

Does anyone have an MFA example of this.

I've tried and I can't get it to work.

Basically say what I want to do is this. I have two groups of objects. One is a bullet and the other is an enemy. I want the same thing to happen when a bullet hits an enemy. I need to test for a collision, and I Can't see a way of doing this with the Foreach object. I always have to pick an existing object.

Are there any tutorials on how to do this?

Roseweave, it mainly seems to be you who desperately need this feature. Because I've worked in a single frame since Knytt, this is unimportant for me. I desperately want other features instead that would help me (better HWA friendly support for importing sprite sheets at runtime, sample-accurate synchronization of samples (to do advanced music games), objects that can be grouped into hierarchies (so that I finally have to stop iterating so much to link stuff together), and the standards; more than 26 alterable values, sub-events, else, and better control over instances (scale, angle, values) and so on.

Each of us has a completely different list on what's important. MMF2 is not built to support what you want nicely. Any solution will be:

*1 An unstable hack (because MMF2 isn't designed to be extended this way)
*2 Have to be implemented separately for every runtime (because MMF2 wasn't designed to be cross-platfrom from the beginning)
*3 Take time from MMF3 (in which implementing features like this will be way less time consuming)

Again, I want the same thing as you, but as I've said so many times, hacking all this into MMF2 is the wrong way to go. Scirra made the right call when they officially stated they'll not work on Construct 1 any more and start fresh with Construct 2. They was able to quickly create a much more stable and expandable product that can grow in the future. If CT suddenly start hacking all (and I admit they're important) features that everybody here wants (we all have different needs, your request is just one), they'll have to take that time from somewhere else (MMF3) and the fresh start that MMF needs - just as Construct did - will be delayed further. This is very bad for competing with Unity, Game Maker and Construct.

I honestly see no problem with the workaround I suggested and it would not take any reasonable amount of time for anything. Again, if copy and pasting works, there should be a way to do this automatically/internally. I do not see what is so hard to understand about this. It is impossible for there to be any issues that do not already arise from the normal process of copy/paste.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nifflas

Because I've worked in a single frame since Knytt,

---

Same. Every since I started using a single frame I never looked back. I can't even imagine how someone can make a game using 20+ frames relying on behaviors(which has a bunch of quirks as is) and such. Instead of being vague, here is exactly why I don't use behaviors;

1) You have to import every object you want to reference into the behavior
2) When you reference an imported object's alt. values, it uses the generic "alterable value A-Z" name instead.
3) When you exit out the behavior editor, you can't undo/redo a mistake..(Why has nobody addressed that yet?)
4) You have no control over what behavior routine is executed first since it depends on which object was created first.
5) If something goes wrong, you have to dig through potentially 1000's of other object behaviors to debug.

Those are the main quirks that set me off. In my opinion it's only useful for widgets and small snippets of code. I don't see any problem with using a level editor. It's easy, reliable and has so many other benefits. What if you were working on a project with a group of people and they didn't have MMF? Do you expect them to all buy it just to do some level design? Then there's the problem of just handing out your source code. Instead, you can just give them your editor/(if you used Tiled, the .tmx file), and they can easily design the level without those problems. It's also helpful for just keeping your game more modular.

Even with good qualifer suggestions, I doubt you'll see it added overnight or within a few months. Yes it'll be in MMF3, but I personally don't want to wait an undefined amount of time until it's released

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roseweave

I don't see why I should have to pay for new software to put it back in, it doesn't make me very confidence that MMF3 will be worth purchasing in it's own right.

---

When MMF3 is released there will surely be a 30-day demo for you to try - then you can make your decision based on your experience with the demo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roseweave

Does anyone have an MFA example of this.

I've tried and I can't get it to work.

Basically say what I want to do is this. I have two groups of objects. One is a bullet and the other is an enemy. I want the same thing to happen when a bullet hits an enemy. I need to test for a collision, and I Can't see a way of doing this with the Foreach object. I always have to pick an existing object.

Are there any tutorials on how to do this?

---

Bumping as I still want to see this.