Yeetoburro1 wrote:

bywok wrote:

And, yeetoburro1, I don't know what you mean by ‘all these glamorous features’. All we are doing is asking for 1 feature we think should be added. What else have we asked for?

I'll go get a list of all the art features that people have suggested in the first 5 pages.

mtech22 wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

bywok wrote:

And, yeetoburro1, I don't know what you mean by ‘all these glamorous features’. All we are doing is asking for 1 feature we think should be added. What else have we asked for?

I'll go get a list of all the art features that people have suggested in the first 5 pages.

Would games look good without art? No. They'd be a blank screen. Also, the paint editor has like 10 buttons. If scratch was really biased towards art, they'd give more features.

mtech22 wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

bywok wrote:

And, yeetoburro1, I don't know what you mean by ‘all these glamorous features’. All we are doing is asking for 1 feature we think should be added. What else have we asked for?

I'll go get a list of all the art features that people have suggested in the first 5 pages.

Would games look good without art? No.

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

How many times do I have to say that the paint editor works perfectly well for games atm?
And as promised, here is your list:
1
2
3,4,5,6
Edit: A new one was bumped up: 7

bywok wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

How many times do I have to say that the paint editor works perfectly well for games atm?
And as promised, here is your list:
1
2
3,4,5,6
Edit: A new one was bumped up: 7

We're not talking about games, we're talking about animation. And it could also be equally useful for games with animated assets.

And why did we even start talking about different forums? We're not even on these forums, we're mainly just arguing with you about how Scratch has huge focus towards art, and you're not listening, you just keep saying the same things over and over, and we give you different reasons. It's pointless. Why are we spending this much time writing this?

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

bywok wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

How many times do I have to say that the paint editor works perfectly well for games atm?
And as promised, here is your list:
1
2
3,4,5,6
Edit: A new one was bumped up: 7

We're not talking about games, we're talking about animation. And it could also be equally useful for games with animated assets.

And why did we even start talking about different forums? We're not even on these forums, we're mainly just arguing with you about how Scratch has huge focus towards art, and you're not listening, you just keep saying the same things over and over, and we give you different reasons. It's pointless. Why are we spending this much time writing this?

You guys are the ones that keep saying “games use art too you can use this in games”. We already HAVE the tools we need for “art” in games.

-Aardvaark- wrote:

Well, I would personally love to have onion skinning. However, Scratch isn't an art/animation website. I don't quite see the point when most people are here to code.

Semi-support. Is there a better reason to have it?

JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:

-Aardvaark- wrote:

Well, I would personally love to have onion skinning. However, Scratch isn't an art/animation website. I don't quite see the point when most people are here to code.

Semi-support. Is there a better reason to have it?

Scratch is an art/games/animations website, practically half of the projects are animations, and animations do take coding, and some art does

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

bywok wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

How many times do I have to say that the paint editor works perfectly well for games atm?
And as promised, here is your list:
1
2
3,4,5,6
Edit: A new one was bumped up: 7

We're not talking about games, we're talking about animation. And it could also be equally useful for games with animated assets.

And why did we even start talking about different forums? We're not even on these forums, we're mainly just arguing with you about how Scratch has huge focus towards art, and you're not listening, you just keep saying the same things over and over, and we give you different reasons. It's pointless. Why are we spending this much time writing this?

You guys are the ones that keep saying “games use art too you can use this in games”. We already HAVE the tools we need for “art” in games.

Elsadea wrote:

support!

SolarKnight wrote:

Ihatr wrote:

SolarKnight wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.

people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement

Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.

how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all

Ihatr wrote:

SolarKnight wrote:

Ihatr wrote:

SolarKnight wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.

people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement

Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.

how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all

It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.

Ihatr wrote:

SolarKnight wrote:

Ihatr wrote:

SolarKnight wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.

people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement

Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.

how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all

It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.

JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:

Ihatr wrote:

SolarKnight wrote:

Ihatr wrote:

SolarKnight wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.

people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement

Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.

how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all

It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.

I actually enjoy using the Scratch Vector editor, I also enjoy not having to upload tons of files into my device, for every single costume, also that's kind of equal to saying, remove the art tools, everyone can go make art and upload it from other sites

akitathecat wrote:

JPOWERPUFFGIRLS wrote:

Ihatr wrote:

SolarKnight wrote:

Ihatr wrote:

SolarKnight wrote:

Yeetoburro1 wrote:

No support, scratch is not an art website, it's a coding website so I dont see why we need all these glamorous features for art.

people mostly use coding on scratch to make games, and if you dont want a game to look bland its good to have animated assets, like a character to play as that has animations for walking in stuff. like do you think the mario games would have taken off as much if you played as a square with no animations? probably not. it would be extremely useful to have for animating and it probably wouldnt be too hard to implement

Yes, and the tools provided can work. They are good enough to use without problems, and that's all that is needed. Scratch is not meant to create art in, the tools provided are meant to compliment the coding aspect, not throw it out the window.

how would adding onion skins throw coding out the window? its one additional art related feature. and while the tools provided do work, its just an additional challenge that could easily be fixed. scratch is meant to be easy and accessible and i fail to see how making animation more accessible is a bad thing or how it could take away from coding at all

It's because onion skins aren't a necessity. Use an art editor that's made for that kind of stuff, and import it into Scratch.

I actually enjoy using the Scratch Vector editor, I also enjoy not having to upload tons of files into my device, for every single costume, also that's kind of equal to saying, remove the art tools, everyone can go make art and upload it from other sites

what about the animated assets? aslo some people like boymcboy find coding games too hard, so instead he decided to [caps are very annoying] when you go to about on scratch it says,[caps are very annoying] “With Scratch, you can program your own interactive stories, games, and animations” ←←←← it says animations so there