Archive: 2 posts

---

(Sorry this is so long, but I don't know what details are important to my problem.) As a first serious effort at making a level, I've been trying to create a "treadmill" survival level like Hedge Hopping, where the camera is fixed and the game platform moves under Sackboy, with the platform going on forever and getting progressively harder. It's 99% working, but for one irritating thing: when control passes from one sequencer containing platform emitters to another, there's a little (about two small grid units) gap between my platforms, representing a delay between one sequencer finishing and the next one starting up. I can't get successive sequencers to "hand off" cleanly, no matter how I serialize the sequencers. (That's the end of the tl;dr version, the rest is details.) Here's how the level works: I have an area camera-locked head-on that Sackboy drops into at the beginning of the level. It has lethal vertical "boundary" hologram struts just off-camera on either side, a electrified glass "conveyer" platform on the bottom of the screen, and a thin-layer dark-matter "hanger" just above. The conveyer and hanger extend off-camera one screen to the left (the "destruction area") and right (the "staging area") of the camera view. On the right side of the right-hand boundary hologram there's a staging area where the game hardware is emitted, in the form of "tiles"?each emitter has a grabbed object (located further off to the right so I can edit them) which are 6 big-grid units wide. Each tile's objects rest on a wooden platform which slides along the glass, hang from a wooden platform that slides along the hanger, or have anti-grav tweaks. Each one of those objects has (or is connected to an object with) a mover which moves it left at speed -3.0, triggered by a tag sensor (matching tags are on the conveyer and hanger in the staging area where the tiles are emitted; this is so I can edit the tiles off in the "editing area" without them moving on me). I have a microchip on a wall between the "staging" and "editing" areas where the emitters live. If the microchip has a single sequencer onto which I place tile emitters at regular intervals, everything works great. But leaving it like that would result in a static level, not a survival level that goes on forever with any randomness. It's in trying to modularize the emitters that I run into trouble. Let's say I have four different tiles total (of course I want more in the finished level, but I'm just trying to get this proof of concept to work): 1) a plain tile with just a platform covered in bounce pads, 2) another like that, but with score bubbles, 3) a tile with no bottom platform (exposing the lethal "gap") but with a hanging sponge Sackboy can swing across the gap with, 4) a floor-mounted obstacle Sackboy must jump over. And let's say I'd like the level to progress like this: Tile 1 to start the level for, say, six emissions (to give Sackboy time to get oriented before anything happens), then an "easy" period of Tiles 1 or 2 alternating with Tiles 3 or 4 for awhile, then a "moderate" period where you sometimes get two of Tiles 3 and 4 in a row before going back to Tiles 1 or 2, then a "hard" period where Tiles 1 and 2 don't show up anymore. (This is dumb and boring, but again, just a proof of concept to get the logic right before I build exciting bits.) So my first thought was to make several sequencers: A) with 6 emitters for Tile 1 (beginning) B) with Tile 1, a random choice of Tiles 3 or 4, and Tile 2 (easy) C) with a random choice of Tiles {1, 3, 2}, {1, 4, 2}, {1, 3, 4} or {1, 4, 3} (moderate) D) with a random choice of Tile 3 or Tile 4 (hard) ? this one would loop All these emitters are set to emit-once, zero frequency, infinite objects emitted, with a lifetime just long enough for the movers to push the tiles off screen past the play area before dissolving. All the sequencers are set to start playback from beginning on input, and all but the last to no-loop. So far so good?if I mock it up on a single sequencer with 30 emitters, or even with emitters alternating with microchips that randomize an emitter, it all works (and with no gap when it loops back to "easy"). In play mode, everything works great. But to make it interesting, I need to break it up. And every way I've tried, I get the tiny gap when I switch from one sequencer to another: An "A" sequencer with Tile 1 emitters on blocks 1-6 and the seventh block being the "B" sequencer, which ends with the "C" sequencer, which in turn ends with the "D" sequencer?in other words, nested sequencers A 4-output selector calling 4 sequencers where the last block is a battery cycling the selector to the next output (via an OR gate), except for the final sequencer, which has no battery and instead loops A toggled randomizer choosing one of the sequencers to activate, with the last item of each sequence being to flick the toggle (this wouldn't work for a real playable level since it would be totally random and you might end up with Sackboy emerging onto the level just to be dropped into a gap, but I just wanted to try it to see what would happen) A complex circuit where I basically do selector-like logic manually by ending each sequence with a battery signal which causes gated toggles to switch so that the current sequencer stops getting signal and the next one receives it The common denominator seems to be: when one sequencer stops and another starts, there's a very short period where neither is active. (I'm not sure if it's a delay on starting a sequencer or on ending one, or just in garbage collection or something between runs of two different sequencers.) So, is there a trick for getting in-series sequencers to sync up? If not, I guess I just need to abandon the sequencers and trigger the emitters directly from my logic, but that kind of sucks because manually writing circuit logic for repeats and loops is a real pain, and sequencers seemed like exactly what I needed. Any insight would be appreciated?I see some Hedge Hopping-like community levels, but none I've found are copyable, so I haven't been able to examine how they work.

2013-01-04 08:48:00 Author: Unknown User

---

Perhaps my solution is overly simplified, but surely having little gaps between platforms is normal if you're not activating a faster mover for the first few seconds of the segment being on stage? It just sounds to me like you're missing a bit of logic that's important - Here's a video by comphermc - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEplXDGqtAM At roughly 4:25 he begins setting up a function that allows his segments to move faster once they are spawned. So long as you have that logic set up, gaps should never be a problem.

2013-01-04 13:16:00 Author: Ostler5000 Posts: 1017

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.