From the video it seems like there are 4 counters that are always set to be some distance from the ball. Also, by pressing a button or repeating while a button is pressed, it adds or subracts from one. 2 of the counters are always set to the ball's alterable values These alterable values represent the directions, and to make the ball move, you code the game so that it starts a loop when the counter is greater than 0 that both subs 1 from the counter and sets the balls position to its x or y coordinate + or - one. The other 2 are the ball's cooridinates on a cartesian plane. I could write an article on isometrics if you want, or just go into more detail here. Please let me know if you are having problems or don't understand my explanation.
If you put a million monkeys at a million keyboards, one of them will eventually write a Java program.
The rest of them will write Perl programs.
Sorry for double post, but if you guys didn't notice in the video, the screen tips and turns depending on what direction you're going in. Any idea on how to do that?
Originally Posted by Robot Cecil if you know a decent amount of trig than its quite simple, if not, then its....not simple .
I love how you claim its simple, yet you can't even begin to point the OP in proper direction.
Your post isn't any better. If the OP knows trig then he says so and Cecil elaborates, otherwise he doesn't waste his time with something that'll go over the OP's head.
I don't know . . . it doesn't look to me like something that Cecil is capable of. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but this looks far from "simple" to me. The way he replied just made it seem to me as if he also has no clue how to do it.
Originally Posted by GamesterXIII I don't know . . . it doesn't look to me like something that Cecil is capable of. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but this looks far from "simple" to me. The way he replied just made it seem to me as if he also has no clue how to do it.
Cause you and Cecil hang all the time and have mathematical programming duels, so you know that, right?
Eat your words troll, and check some forum history in the meanwhile.
Edit: Oh, and by the by, you surely are the right person to point fingers at people claiming to be capable of stuff(though the difference being Cecil can actually back up his claim, you can't). It's awesomely fascinating that you take the chance to jump at a person and criticize their behaviour - WHEN THAT IS WHAT YOU DO IN ALMOST EVERY POST!
Originally Posted by Robot Cecil if you know a decent amount of trig than its quite simple, if not, then its....not simple .
I love how you claim its simple, yet you can't even begin to point the OP in proper direction.
It's damn near impossible to explain anything to anyone that hasn't the slightest clue what they're doing in the first place. When dealing with questions on the internet, the first thing to do is get a handle on how much the OP ACTUALLY knows before wasting time explaining a solution. One thing i cant stand is when people don't take any initiative on their own behalf to research their problem before posting. It's rude, and chances are its already been answered. And forum noobs wonder why everyone hates them so much. (im not referring to retrokiddcaleb in any way, sorry if it sounds that way)
Originally Posted by GamesterXIII I don't know . . . it doesn't look to me like something that Cecil is capable of. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but this looks far from "simple" to me. The way he replied just made it seem to me as if he also has no clue how to do it.
Eat them. I took all advanced math and physics classes throughout high school, and took college level calculus senior year. Aside from calculus which i got a C in, i know what the hell I'm talking about. Now i haven't done any math SINCE then so I'm always a little rusty, but i have all my books (you should read a few) for when i need to refresh myself.
Originally Posted by Eternal Man [EE]
Cause you and Cecil hang all the time and have mathematical programming duels, so you know that, right?
Eat your words troll, and check some forum history in the meanwhile.
Edit: Oh, and by the by, you surely are the right person to point fingers at people claiming to be capable of stuff(though the difference being Cecil can actually back up his claim, you can't). It's awesomely fascinating that you take the chance to jump at a person and criticize their behaviour - WHEN THAT IS WHAT YOU DO IN ALMOST EVERY POST!
God damn hypocritical a**.
I quite agree. you have been helpful in the past to some people, but as of late you've been quite a troll. wtf man.
BACK ON TOPIC
if you look closely at the video, the top counter is positive when tilting right and negative when tilting left. the bottom counter is a bit trickier, as im not exactly sure why its above 200, but it also increases as there is downward tilt and decreases as there is upward tilt. the left and right counters seem to be represent x and y speed.
also looking at the video, i dont think there is any isometrics involved atm other than the image(objects) that is(are) being manipulated.
do you know what it was made with? the program in the video?
Originally Posted by GamesterXIII I don't know . . . it doesn't look to me like something that Cecil is capable of. I'll eat my words if I'm wrong, but this looks far from "simple" to me. The way he replied just made it seem to me as if he also has no clue how to do it.
Cause you and Cecil hang all the time and have mathematical programming duels, so you know that, right?
Eat your words troll, and check some forum history in the meanwhile.
Edit: Oh, and by the by, you surely are the right person to point fingers at people claiming to be capable of stuff(though the difference being Cecil can actually back up his claim, you can't). It's awesomely fascinating that you take the chance to jump at a person and criticize their behaviour - WHEN THAT IS WHAT YOU DO IN ALMOST EVERY POST!
God damn hypocritical a**.
I jumped because he was way too vague. If you're going to help someone don't fucking half ass it, dumbass. Any idiot can say "Oh man this looks doable with >insert random whatever here<, peace!" It makes you look like a fucking tool that doesn't know what hes talking about.
Cecil is probably way more competent in math than I am, especially when it comes to something like trig (my trig "skills" are laughable.) I never claimed that I could do this, it just pisses me off when people claim that they can and show nothing for it when the whole point of the OP posting this topic was for help.
I think the key to the whole thing is the perspective skewing/tilting. I believe the tilting is accomplished by rotating the whole view area/"camera", and skewing the perspective on the y-axis, that would also give the bottom counter a use, a "skew offset" or the like.
EDIT: Since GamesterXIII is deprived of all form of logic and common sense I'll point it out for him, in an attempt to convey THE SIMPLEST OF IDEAS. (I've made the important bits underlined, bold and italic so you know what to focus on if the whole text is too challenging )
CECIL: "It's damn near impossible to explain anything to anyone that hasn't the slightest clue what they're doing in the first place. When dealing with questions on the internet, the first thing to do is get a handle on how much the OP ACTUALLY knows before wasting time explaining a solution."
This Cecil did with the following reply:
"if you know a decent amount of trig than its quite simple, if not, then its....not simple"
Also GamesterXIII, the OP asked for help on accomplishing the physics seen in the video, that indicates that he means the ball physics, and the ball's physics are well accomplished with the use of trigonometry. So if you would use some simple logic and sense, you'd see that Cecil's reply was the perfect reply!
If he would have taken a lot of time writing the actual formulas and code involved in his inital reply, the OP would probably have answered --> "Wha..?", since he doesn't know any trig. And if he doesn't, then it would be dumbfounded to serve the person the complete coding since e wouldn't be able to understand how to use it.
SOOOO..
The way it should go is;
A: How do you do this?
B: If you know trig it's quite do'able.
A: Oh, cool, where do I learn that?
B: In math books, the check out articles on how to implent it in your game.
A: Awesome! I'll do that!
Do you notice in my above example that it fares quite well without stupid remarks and insults like your own?
What is going on around here?
Every new thread seems to be deteriorating into an argument at the moment.
Where's all the Christmas cheer?
Anyway, the ball movement should be do-able without trig.
You could just create a standard xy-vector movement, and then to translate it to isometric, you simply multiply the movement vectors by the unit vectors of the isometric axes. I'm pretty sure that would work...
As EternalMan says, the tilting effect is done by rotating the background objects around the ball. That *does* require a little trig, but it's not too hard, and I posted an example for someone just a few weeks back. I'm not sure the perspective is actually skewed at all.
Advertisement
Post Reply
.
Edited by Eternal Man [EE]
)
