"Imagine playing The Cascades, almost winning, and then seeing a block that has a bubble on it."

Why would I do that? I hate seeing these arguments where the main point is that people are going to use them stupidly. You know what else people use stupidly? Treasure. Secret Areas. Water Taps. Arrows.

Yes, CSD, that is a terrible argument, I agree

but you would do that

And I already hate those enough. How do you think giving them a "make annoying crate" button is going to help?

As I said, few people are going to use it correctly. But the fast majority would just make annoying or pointless crates.

that's a really depressing way of looking at it, jell. I don't agree with the whole idea that people will subconsciously feel like they'll have to use custom crates. I think the average person, especially those who are just trying out the game will look at the custom crate as just more work, when all they want to do is try out the game.

And I don't like all of these sweeping opinions: (paraphrased quotes) "most people will use it badly", "it'll only make people less creative". The amount of creativity put into a level is only judged by those who have been with a game long enough to have their own standard, but when you first come into the game, you don't care how "creative" it is, as long as the levels are fun. And what's wrong with adding this as another option? Shouldn't we just let people decide for themselves what they want to do with their levels instead of trying to keep them from making mistakes? And if they do make mistakes, wouldn't they learn from them eventually?

Here's an example: A newcomer to HATPC may think that using tons of evil traps is cool, but the community gives them feedback and the newcomer learns that it's a bad thing, so they stop, and then they improve their skills. So if the community criticizes levels that have "unnecessary custom objects", then likewise, wouldn't such a trend also stop?

and I don't like it when people assume that you won't be able to design anything worth using with the custom object feature. Especially when all of the options haven't even been laid out yet, so now you're just insulting us, saying that we could never design a set of options that would be worth using.

lol I just got an awesome idea for Aeon: make it so that when you press two arrows at the same time, you run towards that button that you pressed last but you running animation runs in the opposite direction, resulting in a moonwalk.

and when you moonwalk you walk slower?

Haha, CSD, it was just an example. I'm not saying you would, but I'm saying SOME people would.

You might be right Livio, and I might be right. It's impossible to tell.

How about this: you end up doing it, but you release the game BEFORE you make the custom tile maker. That way, the game still works well, and everyone is happy. Then, with the release of the custom tile maker, we can give that a try.

It's entirely up to you though, and you may be right, and it could be an awesome idea, but you can never be sure.

Do what you think would work out best. Again, if you introduced the custom tile maker later (months to a year later) everyone would already know what makes a good level, and what doesn't, thus making the game more fun for everyone.

didn't think of that... probably not.

@ deku,
I actually thought of that possibility. And that just may happen so that we can get the game out earlier too.

I think just adding more boxes would make the game better.

But meh, what do I know

My suggestion is the following: leave costum crates out of Aeon. Only leave in objects types, classes and modes. No advanced costumisation options for existing crates (such as editing falling speed) and no costum crates that the player gets to make themselves. Just keep it simple. This should suite the one player mode best too.

When you are finished, use that same engine to create a new game, but with costum objects. Instead of a one player mode with a story, such as Aeon, it will simply be random levels with random graphics and random costum objects.
I don't think the coding will be much more work, as most of the coding could stay the same.

I suppose that would be the only way to actually keep everyone happy. Make a game with and a game without costum objects. There is no law saying we can't make two games.

but I'm saying that everything will look exactly the same with or without custom tiles. The only complications would be playing the actual user levels, and if those stink it's the creator's fault.

I dunno, then that would lead to three HATPC-like games on the interguild...

That is near identical to what I said!!

Not quite. Aeon is unique as a game, as we will be making some key differences from HatPC. And the customisable game should be costumisable enough to make it unique in itself. I do think this would be the best way to please both parties.

I think that's going too far, though. Especially since leaving the option there would interfere with those who want it. It won't make the level maker more confusing, nor the main game since they won't have any custom objects, and if abusing the custom object feature really is a bad thing, then the community won't make so many of them.

I really don't see how this would disrupt the other side at all. Just let everyone do what they want with their levels

Just, leave it out for now, and then we'll go crazy with V2. I guess I can live with that, if it means we can get a V1 out because the arguing has finally stopped.

This has gotten quite off-topic. We should move all discussion to the other thread.

fine, I'll leave it out. But i'm still coding it in a way that will optimize the whole custom object possibility. but there's not much of a difference actually between the "optimized" way and the old way. Just a few more variables, really.

Nothing wrong with coding with flexibility in mind.

BTW, I was actually a supporter that didn't say much. Still, I'm glad that i'll see this idea used some day. An idea is to make it so that you can exclude custom tile levels from searches and choose a level of the week for both no custom tiles and with custom tiles. The people that don't like the idea can choose not to see custom levels. Sorry if my idea confused you.

actually, I think we'll do that idea.. not sure about two separate levels of the week, though.

man I really haven't been online lately. I had tons of free time today, but I spent it working on Aeon. I finally came up with a good way to do collision tests. The biggest issue I had was the concept of how it would be done, and instead of rambling away like I always do about the complexities of this issue, like I always do, I'll just say that Aeon collision tests are working great Well, all you can do is stand on things, and hit walls left and right. But there's the recoil feature (which bounces you back after hitting the wall) and a buffer (which stops you from landing on just the corner of a tile when it just looks ridiculously wrong). And it's flexible enough so that you can add different buffers and different recoils to different sides of each tile.

I'm also thinking of adding a "bounce" feature, where instead of pushing you back immediately (teleport-style, which is how the recoil works because of the relatively small distance), the bounce feature sort of animates the recoil, where you reach a point gradually through several frames instead of instantaneously. Will probably mainly be used for custom tiles, though

Or if you are "inside" an object, you will get momentum to the opposite direction. Changing how long this momentum lasts is a great addition for costum objects.
For example, if you set the "knockback time" to 1 frame, you will move back for a single frame. If you are still inside the object, you will move back for another frame. This is repeated until the very first frame you are outside the object, getting as close to bumping up the objects as possible.
If you set the "knockback time" to 30 frames, you will bounce back for 1 second until you can move toward the object again.
And if you set the "knockback time" to 0 frames, you will move through the object without any knockback.

I hope that makes sense.

hey that's a pretty good idea.

right now I'm trying to make the motions more fluid. For example, if you step off the ledge, if there's a constant fall speed, then it'll be too sudden and you'd seem to be very heavy, so instead, you accelerate up to your fall speed. Jumping also takes advantage of that by setting you "current falling speed" into negative, and then letting the acceleration take care of the rest, until it reaches the regular falling speed (which would be terminal velocity )

Walking works the same way. You start slightly slower, until you reach you max/regular running speed. And it means that if you quickly tap the arrow key to make a small movement, you won't travel so far.

Sounds like you're making good progress. Keep it up!

Good luck. You need e powers to do that, as the acceleration is dependant on the air resistance, which in turn is dependant on the speed, which is dependant on the acceleration. I don't think it would be too difficult to construct an equation for that, but I need a few minutes to find the equation for air resistance and work out the differential equation.