cs1866244 wrote:

I can't add the extension. It just dosesn't show it.

dude341 wrote:

The ST already have a prototype of griffpatch's physics engine with Scratch 3 in the works I believe, so this is accepted!

say [Where did you find this information?]

say [Also, I feel like this would be something, like the idea of a previous block, that is not in scratch because it's something you're supposed to find out how to make.]

Caleb_Capron wrote:

say [Where did you find this information?]

say [Also, I feel like this would be something, like the idea of a previous block, that is not in scratch because it's something you're supposed to find out how to make.]

Starstriker3000 wrote:

Caleb_Capron wrote:

say [Where did you find this information?]

say [Also, I feel like this would be something, like the idea of a previous block, that is not in scratch because it's something you're supposed to find out how to make.]

What you're doing is called blockspam, and is a type of spam.

EZ-Games wrote:

I remember seeing a topic made a while ago mentioning that this was actually tolerated if it included information contributing to the conversation, although I could be wrong.

DerpyHead0 wrote:

EZ-Games wrote:

I remember seeing a topic made a while ago mentioning that this was actually tolerated if it included information contributing to the conversation, although I could be wrong.

never heard that, and i'm pretty sure that means using the blocks as they'r intended to be used.
this post should be text, not blocks

DerpyHead0 wrote:

not to mention the insane amount of blocks needed to get “physics” to do what you want. this could be different for side view, top down, and sometimes you want things like slopes to work in certain ways, sometimes you want bouncy surfaces, the amount of interactions is pretty much infinite, and can't just be made as a prebuilt thing.

ResExsention wrote:

Funny how it worked with other game engines, then. Unity has a prebuilt physics engine, and it certainly managed to solve this issue. Unreal, CryEngine, tons more.
Also, there are some people who don't want to get into the technicalities of making physics-based games and just want to start making something awesome.

DerpyHead0 wrote:

the key thing is that there's no block list, everything is typed.
when you TYPE commands, you don't have to go searching for a specific block, and you can easily have 200 commands and stacked commands and all of that stuff.

also, if someone couldn't make or use (from another project) a physics engine, they probably would have even more trouble understanding all the options that would be necessary in the supposed inbuilt physics engine. you would HAVE to go into a bunch of technicalities because if the options weren't there, most projects wouldn't even be able to use the physics because it doesn't do what they need it to.

set [gravity v] to [1] :: #7585ff
set [gravity v] to [-1] :: #7585dd // they would start floating up
and other similar stuff :: grey

([abs v] of (9))

ResExsention wrote:

In its simplest form, all that would be shown to the user would be stuff like:

set [gravity v] to [1] :: #7585ff
set [gravity v] to [-1] :: #7585dd // they would start floating up
and other similar stuff :: grey

It isn't as complicated as you think, especially for those new to programming. Of course, we could optionally have some more in depth blocks and options, but as always there would be a simpler interface.

ResExsention wrote:

I don't think we should start negative supporting all sorts of great suggestions just because they're too complicated.

ResExsention wrote:

I have a question for you. Why does this block exist:

([abs v] of (9))

It's too complicated for younger people especially, and yet it exists.

Starstriker3000 wrote:

Caleb_Capron wrote:

say [Where did you find this information?]

say [Also, I feel like this would be something, like the idea of a previous block, that is not in scratch because it's something you're supposed to find out how to make.]

What you're doing is called blockspam, and is a type of spam.

DerpyHead0 wrote:

ResExsention wrote:

In its simplest form, all that would be shown to the user would be stuff like:

set [gravity v] to [1] :: #7585ff
set [gravity v] to [-1] :: #7585dd // they would start floating up
and other similar stuff :: grey

It isn't as complicated as you think, especially for those new to programming. Of course, we could optionally have some more in depth blocks and options, but as always there would be a simpler interface.

what happens when you want gravity to go left? That's a new block.
what happens when you want a bouncy surface? that's a new block.
what if someone wants the player to move with a platform they're on, but another person doesn't (like a balancing game?) that's a new block.
what happens when you want sticky ground? that's new blocks.
what happens when you want magnets? that's a ton of new blocks.
what happens when you want one player to collide with one thing, but another player to collide with a different thing? that's a bunch of new blocks and possibly a sprite rework.
what happens when you want to directly mess with momentum and other calculations? that's a new block for literally everything.
what happens when you want to change how slopes work based on how steep they are? that's a massive mess that i don't know how to deal with.

this idea will either make people want more, or just be a massive pain to use. and even then, you will still probably have to deal with some physics manually.

set [gravity v] to [1] direction [right v] :: #7585ff

forever
if <touching [bouncy surface v] ?> then
set y velocity to [3] :: #7585ff // would be affected by gravity
end
end

forever
if <touching [sticky ground v] ?> then
set [gravity v] to [100000] direction [down v] :: #7585ff // the character wouldn't be able to jump due to gravity overwhelming it
else
set [gravity v] to [1] direction [down v] :: #7585ff
end
end

forever
if <(distance to [magnet v]) < [50]> then
set [gravity v] to [1] direction [magnet v] :: #7585ff // I don't really know the specifics, but it would basically get pulled to the magnet.
... // We could also do a bit of math to make gravity increase as it gets closer
end
end

([ v] of (9) :: operators

DerpyHead0 wrote:

ResExsention wrote:

I don't think we should start negative supporting all sorts of great suggestions just because they're too complicated.

you aren't getting my point. my point is that anyone that wouldn't have the skill to quickly grab and use a platformer engine would have even more problems using any inbuilt system that could be made.