Bump

Baking
Ultra
Minty
Pancakes

No support. Couple reasons why:

1. Why would you use it?
2. The Flash player itself can't really expand.

The main reason, really, is that the “player” can shrink, move around, etc within the actual Flash player, but I don't think it can actively–only passively, like seen in the “full-screen” mode.

Support the real full-screen mode.

Firedrake969 wrote:

No support. Couple reasons why:

1. Why would you use it?
2. The Flash player itself can't really expand.

The main reason, really, is that the “player” can shrink, move around, etc within the actual Flash player, but I don't think it can actively–only passively, like seen in the “full-screen” mode.

Support the real full-screen mode.

1: Why not?
2: Who knows? - it might be able to move around with some clever programming. Even if it could move only every 1 second, that would be better than nothing.
3: Thanks for the support on Sub-suggestion 2. ( :

1: If the ST said that on every block that added nothing but wasn't “bad”, then we would have a spammed-up block section. Sorry, but “why not?” isn't a good enough reason.

2: Move around, yes, but that still wouldn't let it actively expand/contract with active scripts (e.g. forever repeat 50 change height by 1 repeat 50 change height by -1). It would only move around in position, and each position would be hardcoded. Unless the whole page itself is a Flash app

Superdoggy wrote:

Why not?

This isn't the right way of thinking for Scratch. Using the “Why not?” reasoning, Scratch first needs:

-3D
-true multiplayer
-abillity to change usernames
-PM system

and even…
-time traveling projects
-intergalactic gobo hobos
-programming with your mind
-complimentary gold phaser gun which you shoot at your screen and auto-eliminates all bugs

Best of all, Scratch ∞ even lets you AUTO-PROGRAM PROJECTS! NO PROGRAMMING NEEDED! YOU DON'T NEED TO LEARN ANYTHING!
…

Basically, what I'm trying to say is, that while this is a very interesting and creative idea, it is technologically extremely difficult to implement (correctly). On top of a lot of advanced math and several key design issues, the Scratch Team doesn't have time for things like this on top of all their other responsibilities.

Finally, Scratch is designed to be simple and intuitive, but be useful for advanced users, too. I'm not sure this helps either case.

So, yeah. Apologies if I sounded a bit rude, but all I'm saying is that It's not very necessary. While I can start writing with a frindle, the English language already have enough words (if you don't get that joke, don't worry :p )

bobbybee wrote:

Superdoggy wrote:

Why not?

This isn't the right way of thinking for Scratch. Using the “Why not?” reasoning, Scratch first needs:
…

lol - I said why not because I didn't have time to think of a valid reason.
The real reason is that you could for example:

*Make games with high resolution: 800 by 700 screen area
*Make triangular or other shaped projects for a cool effect
*Use the stage as a flashlight - instead of making those gradient effect games where most of the stage is blacked out and you can only see a circle of light - the stage itself could be moved around the screen, and the stage could be a small circle
*Make rotating easier - if you want to make the whole game rotate, just rotate the stage instead of distributing a very complicated script of rotating around a point to every sprite
Artists may like this one: *Make the stage fill up the whole screen so that they can show their art in full resolution

firedrake969_test wrote:

1: If the ST said that on every block that added nothing but wasn't “bad”, then we would have a spammed-up block section. Sorry, but “why not?” isn't a good enough reason.

2: Move around, yes, but that still wouldn't let it actively expand/contract with active scripts (e.g. forever repeat 50 change height by 1 repeat 50 change height by -1). It would only move around in position, and each position would be hardcoded. Unless the whole page itself is a Flash app

lol - sorry about the “Why not?” thing. I ran out of time before I could think of a valid reason. See my reply to @bobbybee for the list of reasons.

BUMP
RPYO
I S
N T
G

Semi-support.
It would be cool, but why would you want to do this??? Also, it probably wouldn't work in the programming.

savaka wrote:

Semi-support.
It would be cool, but why would you want to do this??? Also, it probably wouldn't work in the programming.

Well, it sure would add a whole new level of creativity. Also, you could make many different types of projects with this.

For example: (I'm making a sort of comparison type thingy here to try to get my point across.)

Have you ever heard of “Perler Beads”? If not, I'll tell you. They're a type of art toy for kids. You put colored beads on a base with pegs to make a picture.
Anyways, they have square boards, circle boards, and other shapes. Why? Probably cause you can't quite make everything you want on a square board.

Likewise, if I wanted to make a large circular maze game project that was bigger than the stage, I would not be able to with the rectangle stage. (Without using scrolling/annoyingly small pathways.

Anyways, thanks for the semi-support! ( :

Suggestion 1 I support.
Suggestion 2 I don't understand.
Suggestion 3 I support.

Superdoggy wrote:

bobbybee wrote:

Superdoggy wrote:

Why not?

This isn't the right way of thinking for Scratch. Using the “Why not?” reasoning, Scratch first needs:
…

lol - I said why not because I didn't have time to think of a valid reason.
The real reason is that you could for example:

*Make games with high resolution: 800 by 700 screen area
*Make triangular or other shaped projects for a cool effect
*Use the stage as a flashlight - instead of making those gradient effect games where most of the stage is blacked out and you can only see a circle of light - the stage itself could be moved around the screen, and the stage could be a small circle
*Make rotating easier - if you want to make the whole game rotate, just rotate the stage instead of distributing a very complicated script of rotating around a point to every sprite
Artists may like this one: *Make the stage fill up the whole screen so that they can show their art in full resolution

Sorry about bad formatting because I'm on an iPad but here:

Can't increase resolution, can only decrease it, within a set Flash area
…what do you mean by “cool” effect, ie, is there a practical use
Workaroundable
Workaroundable–it's hard but so is programming an OS. People might say “let us have preprogrammed apps so making OSes is easier” but that wouldn't happen
Real full screen, I said, I support

firedrake969_test wrote:

Superdoggy wrote:

bobbybee wrote:

Superdoggy wrote:

Why not?

This isn't the right way of thinking for Scratch. Using the “Why not?” reasoning, Scratch first needs:
…

…

Sorry about bad formatting because I'm on an iPad but here:

Can't increase resolution, can only decrease it, within a set Flash area
…what do you mean by “cool” effect, ie, is there a practical use
Workaroundable
Workaroundable–it's hard but so is programming an OS. People might say “let us have preprogrammed apps so making OSes is easier” but that wouldn't happen
Real full screen, I said, I support

Okay, I suppose you're right. I think I may have made this idea on a whim. Also I doubt the scratch team would ever implement something like this, but who knows? I can always hope for triangle projects in scratch 3.0.

Why would you use a triangle project? (Don't say “coolness” or something of that sort; if that's the reason, there technically is no good reason)

I also think I'll keep this open for now in case anybody wants to add a word or two to the topic.

firedrake969_test wrote:

Why would you use a triangle project? (Don't say “coolness” or something of that sort; if that's the reason, there technically is no good reason)

Well, it sure could make a project unique, or it could help make a project more interesting.

Support sub-suggestion 2

1234abcdcba4321 wrote:

Support sub-suggestion 2

Okay, thank you for the support!

Superdoggy wrote:

Okay, so I was thinking today, why did the Scratch Team make the stage rectangle? Why can't it be square? Or triangle.

–> Suggestion 1: Screen sizes (Supporters: 2.5)

So, if I were to make a project, it would be quite cool if I could choose from a bunch of templates of common screen sizes, or be able to select a shape and enter the side lengths. So perhaps it could look like this:

Number of sides: {4} sides
Side 1 Length {300} pixels
Side 2 Length {200} pixels
Side 3 Length {300} pixels
Side 4 Length {200} pixels
(All data in {}s can be changed)

Although, since it would always be possible to enter 300, 300, 300, and 350, you would be able to edit the angles/shape sort of like how the vector tool works, except that each side would be stiff and unmoving in it's length. It could work like this:

o—————-o
| \
| \
| \
o——————–o

Each “o” is the equivalent to a node in the vector editor. If it were moved, it would pull the appropriate node next to it so that the side lengths stay the same. Of course, to prevent precision problems, it could be possible to restore default stage settings to avoid having to precariously try to restore it to the exact 480 by 360 stage if you had changed it. Or there could just be an undo button.

Anyways, moving on.

–> Sub-Suggestion 1 (Supporters: 2.5)

It would be cool if there was an option to rotate the stage or set the origin of the stage. Therefore, all sprites' X and Y positions, as well as directions, would be relative to the Stage X, Y, and Direction. The rotation of the stage (and X/Y positions) could be changed manually or through blocks. Even though it might sound complicated, it sure would make scrolling a whole lot easier.

–> Sub-Suggestion 2 (Supporters: 7)

Next to the fullscreen button, an option to go real fullscreen (or if the stage is triangle or any other shape, it would go as big as it could get with only black bordering it, like presentation mode of 1.4) that would hide the basic project player outline and only have a small button to exit.



Thanks for reading. If anybody has an idea that they want to add that I like, I'll put it under “–> Suggestion 2”.

–Superdoggy

I support !You can always teach yourself math

say [This is awesome a cool idea]