I see what you are saying now Kaimetsu. I couldn't tell you how I would do it unless I did it. I know I could do it but I would have to do it to tell you how I would do it.

Imagine, add tons of useless scripting just to bleet out some useless words, amazing, eh?

Who seriously gets offended by a pack of stupid 12 year olds saying stupid words to you over the internet? I don't.

Well, I would have a whol;e new chat bubble system, so it would be pretty simple. Now, getting it to work online is another story, as I do not have a server I could test it on.

You're missing the point, it's against the TOS.

Exactly, and I do for one get offended. It isn't needed.

There is no need for insults or negativity.

If a person cant ask a simple question without being flamed why are the forums here.
If it continues i think Unixmad should step in and tell you to stop it.

*shrugs*

Talk is cheap. Especially talk that doesn't actually answer my question.

This suggests that you haven't fully understood the problem. There would be no need for online considerations.

Do it, I can't see him doing anything about it, he's got bigger things on his plate at the moment.

On the other hand, we mods get quite a lot of free time. Don't assume yourself to be invincible, Brett.

I was waiting for you to come here :) Who says I'm not invincible ;)

*waves*

Stuff you Tseng ;)

I do. You've been banned before, Brett, and if you don't change your attitude then it won't be long before you're banned again. I'm by no means the only one who objects to your conduct.

::waves::

The banning had nothing to do with what I'm doing now. It was alot worse.

It's exactly the same thing, merely to a different magnitude. Again I iterate: If the moderators decide that you should be banned then you will be banned, regardless of whether or not you agree with the decision.

Er...fine whatever.

Well, first off, my PW will have a new chat bubble system. And it will have a language filter. So it will be proven soon enough.

Second, I do fully understand the problem. What I would make my system do is have the players draw chat bubbles over other players, completely clientside. So it goes like this:

Player Chats>Sends Data to other players>other players receive, filter out the chat string>NPC draws the filter string over player who chats

That is my current idea of how to do it anyway, and I think it will work rather effectively...

By default, the language filter will no doubt be on, only those who want to here the nonsense of vulgar language can.

Then why is there doubt over whether or not it would work online?

'Sends data'? Would your script actually be doing that or are you just describing what Graal does? What kind of string would hold the modified chat text? Would it be drawn with a single NPC that iterates through the players and uses showimg to draw the text/bubble over them?

I always have doubt of it working online, as I do not have a server to test it on.

I am describing what Graal does along with what the script would do. Probably a this.string. Drawn with a single NPC, purely clientside, using showtext/showpoly.


Actually, I have already done this system. At the end of the week, when I will show another screenshot, I will be sure to have my guy speak. It works rather nicely, because when the NPCs speak they also have chat bubbles. Also resizes according to ammount of text, and comes with a little chat bubbly thing come from the bubble to the player. Actually rather simple to make, alot easier then I had anticipated...I just put it in it's own function in the GUI NPC.

Bad call. No such thing as a this.string on the clientside.

Bad call. Better to use a complimentary script gani.

As far as I know, there is. I believe I used it online, and I think Stefan add functionality for it offline, as I had 2 this.strings with the same name, and it did not overwrite the other...so yes, I think there is such thing.


Nah. Script gani would be no good, one simple reason being I don't want to give my scripts away. Another simple reason being, it fits fine in my GUI...it really does not make a difference either. I think it looks great the way it is...
Actually, am I able to have it in a script gani with different image layers? That is to say...would I be able to make it so it handles the bubble as a image? Right now, when to bubbles hit each other, they merge, and the text is on the same layer so you can imagine the result. Can this be avoided in a gani?

When you show a screenshot of the chat bubble, you better show them merged.

*cant wait to see this*

x_x


Keep in mind, this is my NPC test level, so you won't really understand whats going on.

Looks good, but seems to me like it could get really messy with many players in one level saying long sentences. Very messy...

Already thought of that...the max width of the bubble is 200 pixels, max height is 5 lines.

I might also create a secondary chat display, showing a level message (well, more like loaded level message) and a server message area.

So, if it does get to crowded, people can use secondary chat methods.

Then what does it do?

See attached level.

I see your point, but it seems a little neurotic. Still, you're entitled to that.

Well, yes, but that's not a reason not to use script ganis.

Yes it does. Example: You want to have a talking rock. The rock is not a player, it is just a rock. Would your current system be able to draw the chat text for it? Maybe, if you iterated through the NPCs as well as the players but then it gets more complicated. Using a script gani would be an adherence to the fundamentals of object-oriented programming, and that's a Good Thing.

Well, it wouldn't look any different if it were drawn with a script gani.

Yes.

I'm not sure what you mean. Two bubbles from different people? If so then I concede that there might be problems. Not insurmountable problems, but problems nonetheless.

Same thing a this.variable does.

o_O. Weird, guess I was wrong about the offline deal.

Hehe, wouldn't want people with bubble text on every server, now would I?

Heh, that argument can go both ways...

Actually, using the command "showcharacter" automatically adds that NPC to the playercount. Using players[this.i].<x,y>, I can get the NPCs X/Y. Showcharacter can be used on any NPC, and you can setshape following. So, either way it works.

o_O. I need to look into it.


See above ;)

Well, exactly. There are problems, but they won't seriously hinder the game experience. Actually, it bothers me more then it would any one else...so I need to look into it. Take a look at above screenshot, also keep in mind the text merges (that is to say, they are on the same layer, so when they merge you can't really read it o_O). Oh well, I can't see a way around this unless I figure a way using layers on the screen level (=>4) and still draw over players...it shouldn't be to hard.

Ah, but is it sent to the server? If not then there's no problem, but it would probably be safer to use local.strings.

Of course not, but any playerworld that stole your script would be swiftly dealt with.

It wasn't really even an argument, but this part of the discussion is pretty pointless anyway.

Wouldn't showcharacter make it look like a character, though? When, in fact, you want it to look like a rock?

Well, it would look the same in a script gani but you should probably script a system where the chat bubbles have dynamic placement and they are repelled from each other such that they only rarely collide. And when they do collide, they should be put on different layers.

...you can use layers all the way up to 100 or so, I think.

You can use showcharacter and still make the image a rock. No problem.

*shrugs*

Fair enough, but it's a messy solution.

Censor System Version 2.1
New feature:[list=1][*] Account: BryanluvsJulia put on permenant ignore.[/list=1]

Hmm..never heard of those. What do they do, exactly?


Might as well save myself the trouble.

Well, at first it would. But, by using setcharani it would change the image. Actually, most of GK's detailing NPCs use showcharacter...because of the fact when you walk behind things like the torch with showcharacter, it is drawn over you, and in front drawn behind.

Ah..well if that is the case, I would rather create it in the gui.
As for the second idea, well, I doubt I could do that without the script getting pretty long, and I'd rather keep it short...so I am stuck with the way it is.

Yes I know, but I am using layers 2-3 right now. =>4 the layers switch from the board to the screen, so it would make the script longer because of the extra stuff needed to make that work. But, I might play with this.

Clientside strings that are not sent to the server.

Depends. I'll agree that risk of script theft is a factor in the decision, but it's one that could be easily outweighed.

:\

Using an inferior system just to make the script shorter seems a little irresponsible.

Oh, I see, I misunderstood. But yeah, you should jump up to the >=4 layers. There are script functions for that kind of thing now.

Really? Any more info? Client.strings are the only ones I have heard of, what is the difference from these?

Heh, well, in the past I have worked on my stuff and tested it on other servers (with Murasamune). Alot of times, they stole my scripts, like my map system. I hate my stuff getting used without my permission, and I would rather not it happen.


Well, I know my limits, and I am alone. So, in the long run, it would be a smart choice. I have alot to do, and I can't spend all my time on this. Plus, I am not the best scripter in the world, but I can make things work well, and look nice. But, if it does not have to do with graphics, I can't make it work flawlessly, and look amazing, as you can.

Ah really? I will look at the new features, I get behind on scripting very easily :(

Any clientside creation/modification of client.strings is sent to the server. Local.strings are purely clientside, meaning they are never sent to the server.

And you also know about clientr.strings, since I explained them to you a few months ago.

*shrugs*

Those situations were different, but the debate is moot. You're free to weight the factor however you want.

:\

'Graphics' is not truly a subset of scripting. All the same principles apply as in any other discipline - they're just output differently. If you're good at scripting in general then you're good at scripting graphical systems. Your weakness may be in your ability to visualise abstract objects in 2D space.

Hmm, did know that. Well, local strings sound good then.

And yeah...been using them on anything the player shouldn't edit.

Well, same general idea. Not being able to trust people to respect your work.

Graphics have alot to do with it...You can't make a crappy light effect turn great with scripting, for instance.

The fact is, I don't see a way for me to make it work the way I would want it. Would I keep a array of the height/width of each bubble, and find a way for them not to collide? I could do it, but it would get messy, and it is not worth the trouble. Get what I am saying?

I think we're running perpendicular here. I wasn't talking about the quality of the images you're using, I was just saying that if you have skill with scripting in general then there is no reason that you cannot make visually impressive scripts (light shows, whatever).

Pretty much. Probably the easiest way would be to implement a simple force-modelling system - all bubbles have a natural state in which they want to be (above-right of the player or whatever) so there's a force pulling them towards that point. But the bubbles also impart a repulsive force on all other bubbles. Nine times out of ten, the bubbles would happily push each other apart in a fluid and practical way.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't agree with your decision. Overlapping text could look quite ugly :(

Well, I can make light shows. But, this is what I have learned. We see professional quality games running at nice frame rates without taking much memory - and it is because of the fact we use to many lights. You can make a amazing light show using amazing light effects, meaning instead of using 50 regular light images, use 1 image following the same animation...

o_O. So basicly, the force power would be the distance from the natural state? The farther they go, the more force the exert, until they go right through a bubble to get to its objective...I would really need to think about this to make it work, and I have to many other things to do. I might just play around with it, though I don't think I could be successful.

It could, but when making a PW, you must make decisions like this and not dwell on it. I realize as my skill increases, I can enhance things later. But as of now, it would be extremely difficult, as I said above.