Archive: 35 posts

---

Who else is pleased that MM have been able to fix Sackboy's jump properly as a tool for all? I think it's great that rather than having to build custom logic for a sackbot, we can now just turn gravity up to 400% (or maybe 200%, 300% to get an in-between feel) and sackboy will jump without all that floatiness. From what I have seen, this is not in the beta but it is confirmed. For me this is a much better solution than having to build your own jump logic (which will inevitably be full of bugs).

2010-10-19 23:14:00 Author: thor Posts: 388

---

I think it is a very helpful tool. It's great that Mm incorporated it.

2010-10-19 23:43:00 Author: QuAcKeRz12 Posts: 176

---

I guess it is good for the people who didn't like the jumping but I never really saw what the big deal was. All I ever heard was "It makes the game too hard." or "The jumping is broken because Sackboy doesn't jump like Mario." But I guess for those who like that it's good...

2010-10-19 23:51:00 Author: DarKnighT_0_9 Posts: 91

---

Awesome. Now the people who played the first game for 2 hours and then never played it again will be happy. Although, turning the gravity up will surely mean you can't jump as high. You'll fall faster, but it still won't please everyone.

2010-10-19 23:56:00 Author: Nuclearfish Posts: 927

---

So no one realised that he mario jump is completely non-physics based and is generally just.... wrong? 400% gravity will not give you the mario jump you want. You'll just get a weird little fast hop and everything else in the level will be sucked down way too fast and look odd. Why people are so bothered with sackboy's jump I don't know. I'm not great at controlling sackboy's jumping but do you know why that is? Because I'm ****. Not because there is anything wrong with sackboys jump. It's physics based. He jumps in a parabola and his landing is based upon friction. Plus, I replicated a Mario-esque jump on the first day of the beta. And nothing about it is based on sensible physics BTW, where is this confirmed? (not doubting, just I didn't see the source yet).

2010-10-20 01:07:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

Yeah I'd like the source of this. I think this is just misinformation.

2010-10-20 01:17:00 Author: RangerZero Posts: 3901

---

Plus, I replicated a Mario-esque jump on the first day of the beta. And nothing about it is based on sensible physics Yeah, If anyone actually were to want it, some group of people like those "Pro" (or whatever the guys call themselves that play those super hard levels) guys could just make mario-jump levels, as IMO it can't be hard at all. Just two movers and two timers with an not'ed and gate wired to the x button should do it just fine.

2010-10-20 01:26:00 Author: Fishrock123 Posts: 1578

---

So no one realised that he mario jump is completely non-physics based and is generally just.... wrong? 400% gravity will not give you the mario jump you want. You'll just get a weird little fast hop and everything else in the level will be sucked down way too fast and look odd. Why people are so bothered with sackboy's jump I don't know. I'm not great at controlling sackboy's jumping but do you know why that is? Because I'm ****. Not because there is anything wrong with sackboys jump. It's physics based. He jumps in a parabola and his landing is based upon friction. Plus, I replicated a Mario-esque jump on the first day of the beta. And nothing about it is based on sensible physics BTW, where is this confirmed? (not doubting, just I didn't see the source yet). Yeah I'd like the source of this. I think this is just misinformation. I'm pretty sure it was in the video that is on G4 from last week. I will look...yeah that is where they said it. I still don't understand the complaint though but whatever. Here is the website it is on: http://g4tv.com/videos/49182/LittleBigPlanet-2-Exclusive-Gameplay-Preview/ P.S. Does anyone love Kareem's accent lol?

2010-10-20 02:24:00 Author: DarKnighT_0_9 Posts: 91

---

It's not necessarily the jumps that get me, but his rebound and grip with the floor. He just doesn't know when to stop. Just doesn't feel tight. but if a level has 1 pixel (or in this case one block) jumps, chances are I'm no going to play it regardless of how buoyant Sackboy is.. Sackboy's fine. Most of the levels I play has enough flooring to clear and things to grab onto for safety. If the level was smart, it would work around the sackboy, not the other way around. But LBP2 would change all that with so many options that you wouldn't have to play him at all. And that kinda worries me a tad.. Since I'm so used to him.

2010-10-20 03:46:00 Author: Cheezy WEAPON Posts: 283

---

I guess it is good for the people who didn't like the jumping but I never really saw what the big deal was. All I ever heard was "It makes the game too hard." or "The jumping is broken because Sackboy doesn't jump like Mario." But I guess for those who like that it's good... Exactly how I feel. I'm amazed at the number of comments I have read about the topic. Every character in a new game jumps differently. Geez. If you don't like the awesomeness that is sackboy then you can go f.. um...play mario. More on topic, I hope the info in the OP is not the case, because platforming community levels would become very annoying if everyone chooses slightly different settings.

2010-10-20 05:31:00 Author: midnight_heist Posts: 2513

---

Exactly how I feel. I'm amazed at the number of comments I have read about the topic. Every character in a new game jumps differently. Geez. If you don't like the awesomeness that is sackboy then you can go f.. um...play mario. More on topic, I hope the info in the OP is not the case, because platforming community levels would become very annoying if everyone chooses slightly different settings. We can already completely alter the platforming settings with sackbots, completely change the gameplay with controllinators, or adjust the gravity down anyway. I don't think giving us more options is a bad thing. So no one realised that he mario jump is completely non-physics based and is generally just.... wrong? 400% gravity will not give you the mario jump you want. You'll just get a weird little fast hop and everything else in the level will be sucked down way too fast and look odd. Why people are so bothered with sackboy's jump I don't know. I'm not great at controlling sackboy's jumping but do you know why that is? Because I'm ****. Not because there is anything wrong with sackboys jump. It's physics based. He jumps in a parabola and his landing is based upon friction. Plus, I replicated a Mario-esque jump on the first day of the beta. And nothing about it is based on sensible physics BTW, where is this confirmed? (not doubting, just I didn't see the source yet). See the g4tv video that darknight posted. There they say that just by turning gravity up, it completely broke sackboy and he was crushed under his own weight - so they made some other coding tweaks. It is their coding tweaks that will allow sackboy's jump to work better. I mean, Alex Evans says it works better anyway. Also, with respect, as much as you may have recreated a mario-esque jump in a day, I can guarantee you it will have been buggy. Situations such as jumping off a ledge onto a lower edge, jumping up an ever-steepening path, jumping on moving objects, jumping on disappearing objects, jumping on the edge of objects, not being able to jump after coming into contact with the sides of objects - these are all things the game engine handles some of which are incredibly difficult to do with logic. Now think of the average LBP player. They want to make their level with a non-floaty jump. Would they rather have a slider, or have to use complex logic that doesn't work 100%?

2010-10-20 09:07:00 Author: thor Posts: 388

---

Also, with respect, as much as you may have recreated a mario-esque jump in a day, I can guarantee you it will have been buggy. blah blah blah... What makes you so sure. Making a mario jump would be easy enough to do with movers and none of the situations you listed would be a problem. I could easily do it in 15 minutes (that's including the option to tap X for short hops and hold it for long jumps), so I have no doubt Rtm was able to do it on the first day.

2010-10-20 10:09:00 Author: Sehven Posts: 2188

---

See the g4tv video that darknight posted. There they say that just by turning gravity up, it completely broke sackboy and he was crushed under his own weight - so they made some other coding tweaks. It is their coding tweaks that will allow sackboy's jump to work better. I mean, Alex Evans says it works better anyway. Interesting, this sounds distinctly like 400% gravity isn't just altering gravity then, it's altering the actual jumping mechanism on the side... Because 400% would pretty much prevent you from jumping completely. Does the vid actually have any footage of this, or just a mention? (I can't view it right now). I'd have thought that a "sackboy jumping floatiness" slider would have been better, if you're going to modify the sackboy jumping anyway - but then of course, you've explicitly added an extra feature and that's not exactly gonna happen at this stage What makes you so sure. Making a mario jump would be easy enough to do with movers and none of the situations you listed would be a problem. I could easily do it in 15 minutes (that's including the option to tap X for short hops and hold it for long jumps), so I have no doubt Rtm was able to do it on the first day. I dunno, getting the "feel" of the thing right is actually quite a lot of work, from what I found. A lot more work than just slapping down a couple of movers and timers IMO. You need to address all of the issues involved with the lack of landing friction, air control, conserving momentum etc. Just moving the sackbot with movers is easy, making it feel like you aren't just moving the sackbot with movers is hard. That said... jumping off a ledge onto a lower edge, no problem, not even sure why that would be a problem jumping up an ever-steepening path, no problem, could need some hitbox tuning for perfection depending on exactly what behaviour is desired, but mechanically sound jumping on moving objects, Should be fine, unless your objects are moving really fast, in which case you're gonna slip off - which lives in the category of "level design issue" jumping on disappearing objects, If the object is there, you land on it, if it's not then you don't. If it disappears while you are standing on it, then the vertical dynamics are the same as walking off a ledge. jumping on the edge of objects, not sure what you mean here not being able to jump after coming into contact with the sides of objects - you can, but it's a wall jump and a completely different mechanism to the normal vertical jump Yes, there are bugs in there, including more that aren't listed above, but it is pretty robust and not really that complex, especially if I were to strip it down to just an enhanced jumping / landing mechanic.

2010-10-20 10:49:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

---

I dunno, getting the "feel" of the thing right is actually quite a lot of work, from what I found. A lot more work than just slapping down a couple of movers and timers IMO. You need to address all of the issues involved with the lack of landing friction, air control, conserving momentum etc. Just moving the sackbot with movers is easy, making it feel like you aren't just moving the sackbot with movers is hard. Yes, but isn't this exactly what the complainers don't want? Seems to me like they want perfect control in the air just like if they were still on the ground. You know, turning in mid-air, no friction, no acceleration/deceleration, no momentum, nothing. That's what the 8-bit platformers were like. Direct, not realistic.

2010-10-20 12:04:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

Interesting, this sounds distinctly like 400% gravity isn't just altering gravity then, it's altering the actual jumping mechanism on the side... Because 400% would pretty much prevent you from jumping completely. Does the vid actually have any footage of this, or just a mention? (I can't view it right now). I'd have thought that a "sackboy jumping floatiness" slider would have been better, if you're going to modify the sackboy jumping anyway - but then of course, you've explicitly added an extra feature and that's not exactly gonna happen at this stage It was only mentioned by Alex, no footage, BUT it sounded as though it's implemented and very useable. I don't think he'd have mentioned it if it were just an idea in an unusable state. That said... jumping off a ledge onto a lower edge, no problem, not even sure why that would be a problem jumping up an ever-steepening path, no problem, could need some hitbox tuning for perfection depending on exactly what behaviour is desired, but mechanically sound jumping on moving objects, Should be fine, unless your objects are moving really fast, in which case you're gonna slip off - which lives in the category of "level design issue" jumping on disappearing objects, If the object is there, you land on it, if it's not then you don't. If it disappears while you are standing on it, then the vertical dynamics are the same as walking off a ledge. jumping on the edge of objects, not sure what you mean here not being able to jump after coming into contact with the sides of objects - you can, but it's a wall jump and a completely different mechanism to the normal vertical jump Yes, there are bugs in there, including more that aren't listed above, but it is pretty robust and not really that complex, especially if I were to strip it down to just an enhanced jumping / landing mechanic. OK well most of these bugs come from the issue of how to detect contact with the ground. As far as I can tell, there is only one way - an impact sensor. But the impact sensor needs to be triggered ONLY when you hit the ground, and not walls, or ceilings. So this necessitates a tag on every piece of "ground" that triggers the switch, but walls and ceilings do not trigger it. The problem is that then you need a very thin piece of "ground" stuck onto every platform which may cause issues on the edge. Then there is the issue of a steepening path (made of 1 material). You can either jump on it or you can't. So it actually needs to be split up into pieces. But what if it is rotating to become steeper? There will come a point where you shouldn't be able to jump but you'll need logic to turn the tag off. Complex rotation patterns and user-alterable rotations (such as sprung bolts) will cause havok with the system. What about when a platform turns upside-down? What about objects such as balls and boxes that sackboy can move about the level? You will be able to "wall jump" off the sides of them. Jumping on moving objects causes issues with momentum. Momentum is also a problem for controlling the downward motion after falling off a ledge and a disappearing platform. You can overcome these problems though. It just depends on what behaviour you want. If there is another way to do this, please inform me, but it seems to me that it's much, much easier to just give people a slider that makes the jumps less floaty (the gravity setting should be separated though).

2010-10-20 12:13:00 Author: thor Posts: 388

---

If there is another way to do this, please inform me, but it seems to me that it's much, much easier to just give people a slider that makes the jumps less floaty (the gravity setting should be separated though). There's no doubt that method will be easier, particularly to the masses. But there shouldn't really even be a feature to adjust the jump floatiness. The jumping is realistic as it is, and consistent with every level you play. I'd hate to see a "Change jumping to be more like Mario because some people refuse to adapt to a jumping mechanic that makes more logical sense" button. The good thing is if creators like rtm make these levels with different jumping styles, even if it is difficult to make and only a few people can do it, there'll still be hundreds and thousands of people who can simply enjoy playing those levels. As far as I know the people who complain about the floaty jumping never made any levels anyway.

2010-10-20 12:55:00 Author: Nuclearfish Posts: 927

---

As far as I know the people who complain about the floaty jumping never made any levels anyway. Most of them are Nintendo fanboys ;]

2010-10-20 13:09:00 Author: Shadowriver Posts: 3991

---

Sackboy's jumping is fine. There are methods to control Sackboy's jump height, speed, and landing. It's hard to do precisely, but even an imperfect control of these helps a lot in general platformers. Understanding the effect of a moving platform (vertically, horizontally, or rotary) on Sackboy's jumping also helps to avoid falling into pits or knocking your head on ceiling hazards. It would actually look pretty silly if Sackboy jumped like Mario, since everything else would still follow physics movement. Already I find mover-controlled Sackbots to have odd movement.

2010-10-20 15:23:00 Author: Gilgamesh Posts: 2536

---

Sackboy's jumping is fine. There are methods to control Sackboy's jump height, speed, and landing. It's hard to do precisely, but even an imperfect control of these helps a lot in general platformers. Understanding the effect of a moving platform (vertically, horizontally, or rotary) on Sackboy's jumping also helps to avoid falling into pits or knocking your head on ceiling hazards. It would actually look pretty silly if Sackboy jumped like Mario, since everything else would still follow physics movement. Already I find mover-controlled Sackbots to have odd movement. Look, I understand that Sackboy's jump is fine. I don't have a problem with it myself. But that's NOT the issue here. This is in the name of variety. Giving players the ability to easily change the gameplay mechanics. 99% of LBP1 levels were run, jump and grab. 1% used innovative mechanics that required an IQ of 150 to build. Now with LBP2, MM want 100% of players to be able to build new mechanics for their game. Maybe a car you steer with the sixaxis. Maybe emit custom objects as a projectile. Maybe change the jump mechanics to be less floaty, or super-floaty. I simply DO NOT UNDERSTAND the complaint that "it works fine as it is" or "we want it to be the same in every level." The whole point of LBP2 is new mechanics, new gametypes. Building games... not levels for the same game. This is what is going to make LBP2 better than LBP1. A simple option to instantly change the mechanics of your level from the default (that at least SOME PEOPLE don't like) is brilliant. More variety is a good thing. Also btw the new jump IS physics-based, precisely eliminating the problem of it looking "out of place." It will beat the efforts of most creators anyway.

2010-10-20 16:46:00 Author: thor Posts: 388

---

As far as I know the people who complain about the floaty jumping never made any levels anyway. I've complained about them, but mostly when trying to create a level that requires precise and reliable movement. I've removed a number of obstacles/jumps from my levels because of how unreliable the jumping was in the context of the platforms you are jumping from. For example, platforms that move upward can increase Sackboy vertical leap at times, while stifling it at others. Now, I don't think this is a big deal (I love LBP afterall!), but there is no doubt in my mind that better jumping mechanics would result in a tighter, more exhilarating platforming experience.

2010-10-20 16:49:00 Author: mrsupercomputer Posts: 1335

---

I simply DO NOT UNDERSTAND the complaint that "it works fine as it is" or "we want it to be the same in every level." The whole point of LBP2 is new mechanics, new gametypes. Building games... not levels for the same game. This is what is going to make LBP2 better than LBP1. A simple option to instantly change the mechanics of your level from the default (that at least SOME PEOPLE don't like) is brilliant. More variety is a good thing. Alright, let me enlighten you. There are two reasons why such an option would be a bad idea: It means Mm is spending time building something that can already be done with the existing tools. Mm's approach is to look at what people ask for, and think of one tool that will enable a whole list of wishes. Like Lego blocks, you make what you want from different components. And in the end people will still complain because the tweak doesn't work precisely as they wanted, or they want to be able to tweak it even more. You'd end up with millions of tweaks and slides. People will change the mechanics just because they can, which makes it a lot harder to play. Imagine every level having a different jump button, you'd have to relearn the skills to play for each level. Besides, a tweaked jump does not make a new game.

2010-10-20 17:26:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

Alright, let me enlighten you. There are two reasons why such an option would be a bad idea: It means Mm is spending time building something that can already be done with the existing tools. Mm's approach is to look at what people ask for, and think of one tool that will enable a whole list of wishes. Like Lego blocks, you make what you want from different components. And in the end people will still complain because the tweak doesn't work precisely as they wanted, or they want to be able to tweak it even more. You'd end up with millions of tweaks and slides. People will change the mechanics just because they can, which makes it a lot harder to play. Imagine every level having a different jump button, you'd have to relearn the skills to play for each level. Besides, a tweaked jump does not make a new game. 1) MM is already doing this. LOGIC GATES ANYONE?!?!?!? The whole point of logic gates is to simplify existing logic circuits and make them easier to build. The whole point of LBP2 is to make those levels that push the boundaries so much easier to make. The controllinator is another great example of this. Yes it enables more stuff, but it's more a reaction to what the community was trying to do, and then making it easier for them. Plus, I am NOT convinced that it can be done completely the same using the existing tools (see my posts in this thread for problems). Even if it can be, it's going to be very difficult to implement and needs making easier if it's going to be a commonly-used feature. 2)"People will change the mechanics just because they can" good. They can make their own GAME not just a level for an existing game. Every GAME has different rules, different mechanics. Next you will be complaining that every RTS game made in LBP2 should be standardised to have the same controls. Every racer should have the same controls and physics. Guess what - they won't. Why should platformers be restricted into having the same mechanics. Furthermore, they can ALREADY change the mechanics by decreasing gravity. LBP2 should be accessible for ALL to be able to create their own mechanics, their own game. Allowing a little bit of customizability is a GOOD thing that allows novice creators to change how their game plays. Saying "THEY CAN DO IT WITH IMMENSELY COMPLEX LOGIC AND PUTTING TAGS ON EVERYWHERE AND ADJUSTING THEIR LEVEL JUST RIGHT AND TWEAKING IT FOR HOURS THEY DON'T NEED A SIMPLE SLIDER" is a stupid expectation to place on novice creators. Unless you WANT to lock novice creators out of the creation process?

2010-10-20 18:59:00 Author: thor Posts: 388

---

i agree with Thor. the jump mechanic is just fine, but there's nothing wrong with having the option to adjust the jump mechanic.

2010-10-20 19:39:00 Author: GribbleGrunger Posts: 3910

---

You should watch Alex's presentation in the BAFTA video. It's not really a game that's been 'dumbed down' so everybody can make awesome stuff, but so that a minority of players can make great stuff for everyone else to consume. In this case, that means that custom jumping mechanics ARE possible to make, but you'll have to be good to make them. There'll still be quite a few levels with different jumping and everybody can play them, but because these levels are part of a smaller group they'll stand out because of it. Now, if a simple slider was introduced, almost every level would have a different jumping mechanic. Can you imagine how annoying that would be? You enter a level and have to get used to Sackboy behaving differently. One of the main consitent things in this game, with every level, is how you control Sackboy, and in my opinion it needs to stay that way. So, to clarify - if only a few levels use custom jumping mechanics, then that's great, but the majority of levels still need to use the standard physics we're all familiar with.

2010-10-20 19:41:00 Author: Nuclearfish Posts: 927

---

I dunno, getting the "feel" of the thing right is actually quite a lot of work, from what I found. Yeah, I suppose I was being a bit cocky with the 15 minute thing. It would probably take more like an hour, but that's just because I've pretty much already done it on my monocycle (http://beta.lbp.me/v/36r2)and would just need to adapt it to a sackbot. I use three movers for jumps: an upward rocket mover for the jump, a downward rocket mover for when you're not jumping (to increase friction between the wheel and the ground so that little bumps don't ruin your ability to jump), and an advanced mover mapped to the left stick with only left/right enabled. The advanced mover runs through an AND gate so that it only turns on when the vehicle is off the ground. Then there's a timer for the upward movement run through an AND gate with the X button (the timer controls the duration of the jump but letting go of the button will cut it short). It uses a selector to toggle between jump, freefall, and on-the-ground (which is triggered by an impact switch). The feel is really good as far as I can tell, though it's a bit unrealistic in that there's nothing visibly causing the vehicle to jump (no rockets or legs or anything--it just spontaneously springs into the air): maybe I'll add in some sort of rocket effect later, but it was mostly done as an experiment. The jump function is very responsive and playable though, enabling the player to easily hop over obstacles--realism took a back seat to functionality in this case. What about when a platform turns upside-down? What about objects such as balls and boxes that sackboy can move about the level? You will be able to "wall jump" off the sides of them. That's the other problem with the jump mechanism I built. Since the impact sensor is on the wheel and the wheel surrounds the whole vehicle, it can wall jump and it can even jump when it hits the ceiling--repeatedly tapping the jump button will let you run along the ceiling. This could easily be solved by making a thin stip of holo with a strong gyro on it and sticking the impact switch on it. Since the holo would only be able to touch things that are straight down from the vehicle, it would only be able to jump if it was touching something on the ground. That would be much easier than sticking keys on every surface that can be jumped off of and you can still bolt things to sackboy's/sackbot's neck so you don't even need to worry about follower lag. (Note that I didn't use this technique on my monocycle because I let it run on the level floor and for some reason Mm decided that holo should collide with and have friction against the level boundaries). I mostly don't mind LBP's standard jump, but the one thing that has always bothered me is that, since sackboy doesn't stick to the ground, if he runs over a small bump, it can just barely throw him into the air just enough to prevent you from jumping, which can be unfortunate when there's one of those small bumps right before a big jump over a pit of death--there's been a LOT of times I've fallen because I hit X just after a small bump bumped me off the ground a bit. It was even more of a problem with my monocycle, so what I did was to add a .1s timer between the impact switch and the disable-jump function. That way, even after a small bump, you still have a 10th of a second in which to make the jump, so you never have any of those embarrassing tap-x-and-watch-sackboy-fall-to-his-death moments. [EDIT] As for sticking landings, use a gravity object tweaker to briefly turn up the bot's dampening to 100% for .1s, but make sure you run it through an AND gate with the left stick through a NOT gate so that it only sticks when the player isn't moving the stick. I haven't tried it, but in theory this should make him stop in his tracks as soon as he hits the ground.

2010-10-20 19:47:00 Author: Sehven Posts: 2188

---

you can still bolt things to sackboy's/sackbot's neck You can bolt things to sackbots!?!? Is this true? Would open up a world of possibility I mostly don't mind LBP's standard jump, but the one thing that has always bothered me is that, since sackboy doesn't stick to the ground, if he runs over a small bump, it can just barely throw him into the air just enough to prevent you from jumping, which can be unfortunate when there's one of those small bumps right before a big jump over a pit of death--there's been a LOT of times I've fallen because I hit X just after a small bump bumped me off the ground a bit. It was even more of a problem with my monocycle, so what I did was to add a .1s timer between the impact switch and the disable-jump function. That way, even after a small bump, you still have a 10th of a second in which to make the jump, so you never have any of those embarrassing tap-x-and-watch-sackboy-fall-to-his-death moments. Yeah this is a problem for me too. I think 400% gravity may eliminate this, at least it's very probable. Don't know what others' issue is with having options. I WANT every LBP2 level to be different personally, so it remains fresh and fun.

2010-10-20 21:01:00 Author: thor Posts: 388

---

Why does this have to be an argument? The normal jumping mechanic works fine in the context of the basic game, but you're perfectly free to change it depending on the level you're trying to create. It's pretty simple.

2010-10-20 21:48:00 Author: Sack-Jake Posts: 1153

---

1) MM is already doing this. LOGIC GATES ANYONE?!?!?!? The whole point of logic gates is to simplify existing logic circuits and make them easier to build. The whole point of LBP2 is to make those levels that push the boundaries so much easier to make. The controllinator is another great example of this... Yes it enables more stuff, but it's more a reaction to what the community was trying to do, and then making it easier for them. Granted, most of the logic gates can be done in LBP1, but not the controlinator. And even though you could already do logic in LBP1, comparing it to jump physics is just silly. Logic is needed in any kind of game, jumping just changes one aspect of one type game. How is tweaked jumps "pushing the boundaries"!? A lot of games won't even have sackpeople in them! And maybe if it turns out a large part of the LBP2 levels still take the effort to make their own jump physics, Mm will see the demand and make some tweak settings at a later point. Every GAME has different rules, different mechanics. Next you will be complaining that every RTS game made in LBP2 should be standardised to have the same controls. Every racer should have the same controls and physics. Ideally, yes. Why do you want to relearn the controls in every level? Real games work with player expectations, too, you know. And consider, when you buy a real game, you're going to spend maybe even dozens hours on it, and make the controls your own. With a LBP level, you usually spend 5 to 10 minutes, and you cannot expect players to relearn the controls and physics every time. Which is why I indeed think it would be good to keep novice creators from tweaking jumps. I don't get your obsession with this. We're talking about the possibility to make games here with all kinds of control schemes. Mm is enabling us to do top-down shooters, puzzle games, point and click, and whatever control schemes may yet be invented... and you complain about a special tweak setting for just a tiny part of the platform genre. @Sehven: Huh!? I tried bolting a hologram to my sackbot, but it didn't work. How do you do it?

2010-10-20 23:06:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

You can bolt things to sackbots!?!? Is this true? Would open up a world of possibility Yup, it works just like bolting an object to sackboy in lbp1 in create mode, only you can keep it attached to a sackbot when you capture it or go into play mode. I tried it 'cuz I wanted to hang out in that world of possibilities. I was going for a rotatable emitter mapped to the right thumbstick without using a creatinator, but I would think it could do all kinds of fun stuff. I WANT every LBP2 level to be different personally, so it remains fresh and fun. I gotta' agree with Rogar on this one. I don't necessarily want to relearn the controls on every single level I play (especially since a lot of people don't seem to know how to make good controls). Still, it's nice to have the option to alter controls for some levels. @Sehven: Huh!? I tried bolting a hologram to my sackbot, but it didn't work. How do you do it? Well I only did it the one time, but it works the same as bolting to sackboy in Lbp1. It's a bit tricky getting it in just the right spot--gotta hit right around the neck. It's easier to stick the bolt in the holo and then move it over the bot's neck and keep trying until you get the bolting sound. [EDIT] It will also layer shift with sackbot, which works best if you make it a thin layer (so it doesn't block him from the front layer).

2010-10-21 00:24:00 Author: Sehven Posts: 2188

---

couldn't you set a local gravity on a sack bot, and global gravity on the world? i dunno i haven't messed with gravity settings yet. but if this solution is possible you could have LBP world physics and Mario style jumping?

2010-10-21 01:33:00 Author: Spyre-wolf Posts: 63

---

couldn't you set a local gravity on a sack bot, and global gravity on the world? i dunno i haven't messed with gravity settings yet. but if this solution is possible you could have LBP world physics and Mario style jumping? Yes. Note that this feature has only been mentioned by Alex Evans in the g4tv video, it's not in the beta. I don't get your obsession with this. We're talking about the possibility to make games here with all kinds of control schemes. Mm is enabling us to do top-down shooters, puzzle games, point and click, and whatever control schemes may yet be invented... and you complain about a special tweak setting for just a tiny part of the platform genre. You are the one complaining... I'm just saying it's a good thing to have more options... (like this confirmed feature)... you seem to be contradicting yourself - on the one hand you want every level to control the same, and then you say we can make games with all kinds of control schemes?!? We KNOW that all the expert creators will (and have) create new platforming mechanics for their games... and it's the experts' levels we'll all be playing, so you'll have to get used to the controls of each game anyway... a game will be rated poorly if it's difficult to get to grips with... here I'll spell it out: Racers: All kinds of different control schemes RPGs: All kinds of different control schemes Puzzle games: All kinds of different control schemes Top-down shooters: All kinds of different control schemes Platformers: You want all control schemes to be the same Can you see where your faulty reasoning is? For a start, people can make new control schemes for platformers anyway, but now this makes it easier... you seem to want all novice creators' levels to play the same, but make an exception for expert creators? Don't you want to save expert creators some time as well?

2010-10-21 10:36:00 Author: thor Posts: 388

---

Huh!? The previous post you asked whether I thought all RTS'es should have the same control scheme, and I answered yes. And now you claim I say the opposite! In stead of trying to disect sentences to find something you can twist and throw back at me, try reading and thinking about what I'm trying to say. I'm not asking you to agree with me. You said you didn't understand why people would want it to be the same in every level, so I tried to explain.

2010-10-21 11:36:00 Author: Rogar Posts: 2284

---

My concern with being able to make custom jumps/controls is that from what I've seen of the published levels in the beta, very few people "get" how to make controls that feel right. Every car I've seen can sit still and turn in place (even Mario Kart doesn't let you do that--you have to be moving to steer). Super jumps always seem to feel less like sackboy is a super good jumper and more like he's jumping on the moon or something (I would say that turning down gravity is NOT the solution to giving sackboy a super jump--it's the solution to playing in a low gravity environment). A lot of top down levels make you turn left/right relative to the bot/vehicle rather than the player (so that if you're facing right and you want to be facing up, you press left; if you're facing down and you want to be facing left, you press right) rather than just pointing the stick in the direction you want to go (that one may be a matter of personal taste, but I find those kind of controls extremely cumbersome). When people add emitable objects to sackbot, they always seem to only be able to fire in one direction or, if you're lucky, two (right/left), rather than being aimable (there may be situations where this is preferable, but I think that in most cases, some ability to aim would be nice). Perhaps the overall quality of custom controls will go up after a few creators publish stuff with really good controls. Once people have realized that it's possible (and not even that difficult) to do better, maybe they'll all step up their games. I hope that's the case anyway. Btw, if you wanna see an example of good controls, check out my Monocycle (http://beta.lbp.me/v/36r2) (yeah, I know that's arrogant, but they're good because I put a lot of effort into them and I responded to feedback), GruntosUk's Sackometry Wars (http://beta.lbp.me/v/w-nx) (handles exactly like it should), or Ayneh's Grid Shooter (http://beta.lbp.me/v/x-kw). Sack Turismo had decent controls (though it did the left/right thing and the sit and spin things that I mentioned and it could've used a bit of work on collisions), but I can't seem to find it on lbp.me now.

2010-10-21 15:33:00 Author: Sehven Posts: 2188

---

@Sehven: I think most people (including me) want to use the analog sticks like you describe, it's just a lot harder than the simple left/right connection. Do you know of any logic giveaways or decent tutorials? EDIT: Yeah, I know it has to do with joystick rotator, however I couldn't get it working like I wanted. This should probably be in a different thread anyways..

2010-10-21 21:18:00 Author: midnight_heist Posts: 2513

---

@Sehven: I think most people (including me) want to use the analog sticks like you describe, it's just a lot harder than the simple left/right connection. Do you know of any logic giveaways or decent tutorials? Joystick rotator does exactly that... Unless I'm misreading Sehven's post

2010-10-21 21:33:00 Author: rtm223 Posts: 6497

Posts: 1077139    Threads: 69970    Members: 9661    Archive-Date: 2019-01-19

Aus dem Archiv wurden alle persönlichen Daten wie Name, Anschrift, Email etc. - aber auch sämtliche Inhalte wie z.B. persönliche Nachrichten - entfernt.
Die Nutzung dieser Webseite erfolgt ohne Speicherung personenbezogener Daten. Es werden keinerlei Cookies, Logs, 3rd-Party-Plugins etc. verwendet.