I-Iz-A-Litten wrote:

wafflegoatz wrote:

I-Iz-A-Litten wrote:

wafflegoatz wrote:

Better idea! What about a block that if you want to make a sidescroller but cant make it auto move then what you can do is make a block that can do effects while changing the stage

next backdrop with effect [  Slide v]::looks

That could make it look like one but it isnt

please only put one suggestion per topic

Well That was me adding on to it!

only put one suggestion in ONE topic, make a separate topic for each suggestion

Well,that's an edit of a block,not a different block.

“And, Scratch doesn't always have to be super simple, and, for that matter, shouldn't be. For example, if you suggested a “physics” block, which made a sprite follow the laws of physics, this would probably be rejected. Why? It would certainly be useful! The problem is (beyond the difficulties in making such a block) that it makes Scratch too easy. It is kind of taking the “program” out of “Imagine, program, share”. We don't want to be able to make anything in five minutes; that ruins the point of programming, having fun, and putting effort into your projects”. - itchycatill

Read the stickied topics

Ok I get how easy scratch would be! But this topic has kind of turned into an background change with effects so later I will start one.

mystery4000 wrote:

“And, Scratch doesn't always have to be super simple, and, for that matter, shouldn't be. For example, if you suggested a “physics” block, which made a sprite follow the laws of physics, this would probably be rejected. Why? It would certainly be useful! The problem is (beyond the difficulties in making such a block) that it makes Scratch too easy. It is kind of taking the “program” out of “Imagine, program, share”. We don't want to be able to make anything in five minutes; that ruins the point of programming, having fun, and putting effort into your projects”. - itchycatill

Read the stickied topics

But weren't physics blocks added as an extension to Scratch 3.0??

Charles12310 wrote:

mystery4000 wrote:

“And, Scratch doesn't always have to be super simple, and, for that matter, shouldn't be. For example, if you suggested a “physics” block, which made a sprite follow the laws of physics, this would probably be rejected. Why? It would certainly be useful! The problem is (beyond the difficulties in making such a block) that it makes Scratch too easy. It is kind of taking the “program” out of “Imagine, program, share”. We don't want to be able to make anything in five minutes; that ruins the point of programming, having fun, and putting effort into your projects”. - itchycatill

Read the stickied topics

But weren't physics blocks added as an extension to Scratch 3.0??

Ok, so the example in the sticky is no longer relevant. That doesn't mean the argument no longer holds water.

wafflegoatz wrote:

Ok I get how easy scratch would be! But this topic has kind of turned into an background change with effects so later I will start one.

Please,think about the reasons why this block should not be added. (Super simple workaround). And don't start another topic suggesting this,or it will be reported for the duplicate matter.

DaEpikDude wrote:

Charles12310 wrote:

mystery4000 wrote:

“And, Scratch doesn't always have to be super simple, and, for that matter, shouldn't be. For example, if you suggested a “physics” block, which made a sprite follow the laws of physics, this would probably be rejected. Why? It would certainly be useful! The problem is (beyond the difficulties in making such a block) that it makes Scratch too easy. It is kind of taking the “program” out of “Imagine, program, share”. We don't want to be able to make anything in five minutes; that ruins the point of programming, having fun, and putting effort into your projects”. - itchycatill

Read the stickied topics

But weren't physics blocks added as an extension to Scratch 3.0??

Ok, so the example in the sticky is no longer relevant. That doesn't mean the argument no longer holds water.

I know. I'm just saying that the physics block won't be a good example anymore.

Charles12310 wrote:

DaEpikDude wrote:

Charles12310 wrote:

mystery4000 wrote:

“And, Scratch doesn't always have to be super simple, and, for that matter, shouldn't be. For example, if you suggested a “physics” block, which made a sprite follow the laws of physics, this would probably be rejected. Why? It would certainly be useful! The problem is (beyond the difficulties in making such a block) that it makes Scratch too easy. It is kind of taking the “program” out of “Imagine, program, share”. We don't want to be able to make anything in five minutes; that ruins the point of programming, having fun, and putting effort into your projects”. - itchycatill

Read the stickied topics

But weren't physics blocks added as an extension to Scratch 3.0??

Ok, so the example in the sticky is no longer relevant. That doesn't mean the argument no longer holds water.

I know. I'm just saying that the physics block won't be a good example anymore.

Yeah, someone should probably change the stickies.

-/Deleted/-