Archive: 5 posts

---

[Edit] Sorry, this is meant to be in the LBP 2 Help! forum. Can someone please move it? Hi all! This problem is quite delicate and I honestly am not expecting anyone to know the answer to my problem, but it's worth a shot. My problem in a nut shell: Sensor switches behaving differently despite being copies of each other. This is a latency issue; one switch triggers immediately, the other a frame later. Explanation: I have two microchips that are exact copies of each other. Each microchip has two sensors, 1 key, and 1 emitter. Gameplay wise, the two microchips are warps. The player's game-piece (this is a puzzle game) passes over one microchip, and is removed and emitted on the other. It's a little more than that, but I'm simplifying the problem here. Components: Sensor #1 triggers when the player is over the microchip. The Key is triggered by this sensor. Sensor #2 is triggered by the Key in the other microchip. The Emitter is triggered by this sensor. (So I have two microchips talking to each other using the same keys. It works, because sensors cannot pick up keys on their own microchip, only on other ones; so when one 'talks', it doesn't hear itself, only the other microchip does.) I'll call the two microchips Microchip A and Microchip B. Now, my problem is thus: If the player enters Microchip A, to warp to Microchip B, then first Sensor #1 in Microchip A lights up then 1 frame later Sensor #2 in Microchip B lights up. However, if the player enters Microchip B first, then B's Sensor #1 and A's Sensor #2 light up at exactly the same time. This means it is detecting the player, transmitting the key signal, and picking it up in the other microship, all in the same frame. Contrasting if the player enters A, when first one sensor lights up and the key too, 1 frame passes, and then the other sensor lights up. This problem isn't the end of the world, but it does mean that going through B -> A is faster than going A -> B, because it takes 1 less frame. My gameplay doesn't break due to this, but, it does bother me because I have no idea why this is happening. Also, if I delete Microchip A and replace it with a duplicate of B, the same problem happens; or if I remove B and replace it with a copy of A. It seems to be something deeper than the game logic...and if that's the case, I suppose I have no chance of fixing it.

2012-04-18 22:34:00 Author: merkaba48 Posts: 79

---

Moved as requested.

2012-04-19 00:22:00 Author: Lady_Luck__777 Posts: 3458

---

Could you post a picture of the logic you have? Maybe it's something in the complex logic you have that isn't working.

2012-04-19 01:10:00 Author: Wolffy123 Posts: 406

---

This is not a good fix, but it might be a fix none the less... What if you just induce one additional frame of latency in the chip that's the faster one? You can do that by using 3-port Selector. The main signal goes into I1 (Input 1), O1 (Output 1) goes into I2, O2 goes into I3 and O3 continues on with a 1 frame delay compared to I1.

2012-04-19 10:55:00 Author: Slaeden-Bob Posts: 605

---

Hi all, thanks for the responses. Slaeden, unfortunately the microchips must be duplicates as they are emitted from the same emitter! This problem is not breaking my game-play though, so I am not too bothered. Really I am just curious as to why this is happening at all. Wolffy, as requested, here is an extremely stripped-down version of the logic: http://ic.lbp.me/img/ft/0fca696f0332efcf5db90e4005d2b79318c89aca.jpg Two identical microchips. The one on the left has picked up the player's game-piece, and the one on the right immediately detects this and puts out its signal. However, if the other microchip is triggered in the same way, its sister microchip picks up the signal one frame later. So, for frame #1 it looks like: (Please pretend the microchips positions are reversed; the chip on the left is the opposite chip to the one in the first picture) http://i6.lbp.me/img/ft/d76225c20934df7626efa5ab3245dbbac1d42f54.jpg And in frame #2: http://i0.lbp.me/img/ft/63037de3f5ed82484318aabd3ac05238594b6124.jpg I had a test with 5 of these microchips and moved the player through each of them; 1 chip behaved like the first example, with 0 latency, and all the other chips behaved with a 1 frame latency. I also tried having the 2nd sensor outside of the microchips - this activated instantly with no latency. So...I can work around it. All this means for me (hopefully) is that going through a warp from A to B will be faster than from B to A. I've found this quite a frustrating experience, though; something that really should work at least consistently, but doesn't! It is, however, consistently inconsistent. *sigh*

2012-04-20 00:31:00 Author: merkaba48 Posts: 79

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.