Thread: Project Carrot
View Single Post
Soulweaver

JCF Member

Joined: Aug 2007

Posts: 42

Soulweaver is an asset to this forum

May 9, 2013, 04:36 PM
Soulweaver is offline
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violet CLM View Post
It's basically a bug in the original. They wanted layer 8 to snap to the upper left corner of the screen at all times when xSpeed=0 and ySpeed=0, which isn't how other layers work, in order to make backgrounds look better, but then they took that too far and made it true even if the speeds aren't zero. As a result, there isn't really a right way to treat layer 8 speeds, so much as there are various different statements it's possible to make by treating them one way or another.
Ah, I see Also, you have stated another difference in my implementation just now: any layer with zero speeds is treated equally in PC. I set Layer 3 to zeros in JJ2 and tested it, from what I gathered it just disappeared, so I guess not mimicing that wouldn't really hurt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Violet CLM View Post
Broadly speaking, in local play single player, objects more than about 32 tiles away from the player will be deleted from the active object list. There are a handful of exceptions -- rotating rocks in particular are never deleted -- but for the most part that's how it works. It's supposed to be a memory/speed-saving measure, but it does end up having various side effects, positive and negative, for real gameplay and level design. (For example: without it, all swinging vines are synced with one another.)
Performance was the first thing I thought of, but if it indeed affects other things too, then I suppose I should do something about it. Just not running their tick events would work otherwise but I launched JJ2 and I can see they also lose whatever changes they were affected to (gems shot down are floating again) so I guess I'll need to think into this a bit more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cooba
I remember you!
Ha, just noticed that How's that possible when I barely posted any posts here or even logged in for four years (according to what "you last visited" told me, anyway)?
E: Oh, it seems we had a PM conversation back then at least. God, I can't stand to look at my posts, my English was so simple back then
__________________