I tend to use semi-transparent backdrops to make invisible collision "masks". java seems unable to support this.
Maybe a "mask" object could be added to MMF2?
does this work for anybody?
thanks.
I tend to use semi-transparent backdrops to make invisible collision "masks". java seems unable to support this.
Maybe a "mask" object could be added to MMF2?
does this work for anybody?
thanks.
Now that's a good suggestion. I'm actually using lots of completely transparent backdrops (semi-transparency 128) to build the collision mask of my levels. Didn't tested with the Java Runtime yet, but since you've posted about the problem I'm worried now.Originally Posted by ansemsnobody
it'd almost be better to have b/w collision mask "images" built into the objects/backdrops themselves... having a separate mask object for each object (especially ones that move) is far from idealNow that's a good suggestion. I'm actually using lots of completely transparent backdrops (semi-transparency 128) to build the collision mask of my levels. Didn't tested with the Java Runtime yet, but since you've posted about the problem I'm worried now.
I think that the ideal solution would actually to have both, mask images for graphic objects and some sort of stand alone mask object.
Being able to create mask images embedded in graphic objects would be very handy, so we could avoid creating seperate collision objects for example.
And a mask object could be very useful to create collision masks of any kind of complexity. Those invisible objects could be optimized so MMF2 wouldn't have to deal with their display.
I'd be curious to know what Clickteam think of these suggestions.
I agree. Having a separate mask possible for objects would be useful. It would be even cooler if we could get a vector based masking system(draw vector shapes on the screen and be able to use them as invisible collision masks for things)
I second that
Couldn't the overlay be used as a collision mask or am I missing what your saying?
(Discounting the fact the overlay would need to be converted to Java)
In Java, you cannot set the semi transparency using the property. You have to create images with alpha channels to do so. And you do not have ink effects.
Jeff I knew that at some point I would have to check the Overlay Redux object (that I've never used). I'll definitely do it!
Now that's a particularly important point that should probably be mentioned in every possible way. No kidding.
This means, for example, that we can't fade-out smoke particles by using the active's semi-transparency property. Nor have a ghost sprite with variable translucency as he floats in the air or performs different actions. Am I right?
If yes then that's quite annoying because performing the same effects with alpha channel would considerably increase the number of animation frames. Eek!
Jeff: Overlay redux can be used as polygonal collision mask?
Oliver: As a commercial game developer like you, I'm watching closely and with big interest all these new great features (Java and HWA coming soon), but I think now that using Java to port the game to another OS, like Mac or Linux through Java is not a good idea. It has too many drawbacks, performance hits and limitations,.. but wait, I'm not saying Java runtime is useless, far from it. I have a feeling that when Java 2 mobile and blu-ray comes out, many users will benefit from it, which is very good. We will be able to enter the mobile games market if I'm not mistaken. I'm sure you'd love to see a Mac runtime as much as I would, but I think now that Java is not what we're looking for, for this, simply because it is not made for this purpose. (I mean games with full quality, 800x600, ink effects and so on). Also, the portals won't publish .jar files, would they?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote