I made a flash game with ActionScript 3. I want when the character falls into water or swamp
or his score=0, the game to be start from first.
I want load scene from first.
I am a beginner in as3. Please help me by details.
But I do not know what code to write.
I'm grateful for your advice.
I can only suggest grouping your level dependent variables and writing your own reset() method that is used to initialise and start the game. Then calling that whenever one of the loss conditions are met to restart the game.
As far as I know, this may not always be a quick and clean thing to do, nor do I know of any single "one size fits all" solution that won't causing any further problems down the line. This is more to do with how your design and layout your game code.
Related
I made a arkanoid game and sometimes the ball laggs is there a simple fix to this? Im not sure what code to post because I got a lot of code
There is a lot a reason for that... It's probably a framerate problem. You need to install or code a tool to check it.
If the framerate sometimes falls you need to inspect your main game loop and find the reason.
It's impossible to help you more with so few details.
To find the cause of an unknown performance issue, use the free Adobe Scout tool.
Once you get it running, you should see a spike in the graph it produces at the moment the game lags. Inspecting this spike should reveal the cause of the lag, whether it be garbage collection, a very intensive method, or something else.
Here's a 'getting started' link:
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/scout/articles/adobe-scout-getting-started.html
I want to learn to make infinite running games like temple run.... but at a very basic level. I am good at as3 and flash... and i have created all the graphics.... the whole scenario of the game is in first person view. And the graphics is all created in Flash.
Can anyone please suggest some tutorials or any techniques that i should use to make the objects look like they are coming from a far point and how i can write the logic of hitting them or escaping them.
Thanks for ur help... :)
I'm new to Actionscript. There's probably a better way to do this, and if there is, I'm all ears.
What I'm trying to do is have a background layer run for, say 150 seconds in a loop. Then have another layer (we'll call it Layer 1) with a single object on it loop for 50 seconds. Is there a way to have Layer 1 loop 3 times inside of that 150 seconds that the background layer is looping?
Here's the reason I want Layer 1 to be shorter:
When a certain combination is entered (for example, A1), an item will pop out of and in front of the object on Layer 1.
I haven't written any code for it yet, but my hopeful plan is to have the background layer run continuously then have different scene sections on Layer 1 for each of the items coming out of the object on Layer 1. That way when A1 is entered, Layer1 can goToAndPlay(51) without messing up the background layer.
If it helps you understand it at all, it's a vending machine project. My group's vending machine is the TARDIS. The TARDIS is flying through space while you're entering what you want out of the vending machine and stuff is popping out of it.
If I understand correctly, the background is a MovieClip that loops within its own timeline. When Flash plays through a timeline, the timing is dependent on the performance of the computer and how complex the animation is. You can add an audio track set to 'streaming' to lock the timing down, which will then drop frames if the CPU is overloaded. I have used a silent sound set to loop infinitely and play mode 'streaming' to do this when there is no audio to be used.
Instead of using timeline animations I would recommend using TweenMax http://www.greensock.com/tweenmax/ as it allows tween chaining, that is creating a chain of sequential and parallel tweens. When you use a tween you define the timing in seconds and can use values like 1.25 seconds. It will be accurate to the timing you define. You can also run methods on complete, use easing and all sorts of goodies. If you get comfortable using this you will be able to create much more complex interactions in your Flash projects and also be able to change animations and timing much easier than messing with the timeline.
In fact when hiring Flash developers we always screen candidates by asking if they prefer to do animations on the timeline or programmatically. Although Flash is on its way out, still good to learn as the ideas will apply to javascript and whatever new technology comes about.
I'm writing a very simple Java Game. Let me describe it briefly:
There are 4 players in a Map.
The map is a two-dimensional matrix with a value called "height"
The height between 2 nodes is the cost of that edge.
Use Dijkstra algorithm to help player navigate from a source to a destination.
Four players take turn to make a move. The total move is 8( left top, top, right top.... )
If they meets, fight for gold value, otherwise move to their target.
As they move, their strength decrease by the height difference between two nodes.
... etc
....
The problem that I'm encountering is that the source code is getting longer and complex day by day. And I think I'm using a wrong approach somehow, I feel so tired because of constantly changing the implementation. Here is my approach:
Write out all requirements.
Create all the object that I need with all getter and setter.
Create a static class to test the logic
Create unit test while putting the logic together
Add some more code, then change to code to fit the test
Write a big method that run, then break it down into smaller methods, then write unit test again.
If everything work fine, add more requirements, add more code
Then things are getting complicated because the more code I added, the complexity increases. No longer have time to write unit test because create a test case now requires too much work
Re-design, then change the implementation, go to step 1 again.
I'm come from a C++ background, and I'm only comfortable with writing 'static' libraries such as: stack, queue, link-listed, tree... Game is really a big challenging to me, especially I have to use Java. I understand the core programming is the same, so picking up Java was not really that bad. However, the time of looking up Java's API is not little. Further, the game logic is really hard to write. When this object moves, other object got affected..., so creating test for a method depends on many other methods...etc.
I really need an advice. Could anyone share some experience of how to write a game to me? I only have two weeks left for this assignment. I'm currently have 45 classes now, I feel so lost because the more I wrote the more it gets complex :( !
Best regards,
Chan Nguyen
First start thinking like a java programmer. Think as every thing in your game as an object, like the board, think about the properties and methods it has, its interfaces, how it interacts with the other objects.
If you need help getting started here is a great tutorial that guides you step by step to do a simple java game, this might put you in the right frame of mind to start programming your own. I strongly recommend you to follow the tutorial.http://www.cokeandcode.com/asteroidstutorial and to use the libraries that they used for developing the interfaz there.
I view game code architects with respect: games are complex systems with emergent properties at runtime, unusually intense interaction requirements (UI, controls) which makes a lot of OOP theory questionable value. It can be difficult to reuse game code. And, a lot of upfront planning work is wasted time.
Most game coders I know, beginning or veteran, succeed with a "just do it" iterative process. e.g.
1) write a minimal prototype. get a very basic system working, using the simplest, most obvious architecture you can think of. (my guy can run around the screen). 5 or 10 objects max.
2) add functionality (points, rules, traps, NPC behaviours, etc) and playtest, over and over. This hack on hack can makes for poorly structured code, but most coders can make it work.
3) rewrite. Programmers grit their teeth at some of the hacking they had to do in (2), and will want to throw it all out and rewrite. Resist this urge until the game is testable (as in, plyaers can sometimes enjoy it, somewhat), or a new feature would require rewriting. Then, rewrite pretty much EVERYTHING from scratch. This goes WAY faster than you'd expect, and results in solid, well-structured code.
Game coders do test, but comprehensive testing of ALL code is rare. two reasons: emergence and culture. Games have emergent properties at runtime ("yeah, but the points COULD go negative when the NPC is killed when ...."). Since games are usually for entertainment purposes, there is a culture of fast-and-loose testing. Games aren't as important as, say, missile control code.
I expect others with more coding experience answer this. (I have written a fair bit of code but I tend toward quick and dirty script type coding style - I know lots of coders who are way better than me.)
I'm building a game such as Same Game, when I have to create a new level I've just run an algorithm to fill the board with N colors, this algorithm fills the board at random, but obviously the levels generated this way are not all has a solution.
I have to make a function to resolve this problem, so the game can be played by a perfect player for ever.
I have a maximum of 6 color and a minimum of 2 and the board has a reasonable size (14x12) but can be modified.
The language is irrelevant.
EDIT: I don't need to solve the puzzle, I need to create levels that has at least one solution.
I've just check out about five different versions of the game on Ubuntu and I've found an answer you can pillage from!
Simon Tatham's Portable Puzzle Collection
I play about five of his games incessantly but preferred Same GNOME. I just loaded up his Same Game and it has the option to ensure solubility when creating custom games. Even has a customisable scoring system. It's all awfully advanced.
An exe and source code is available from the above link.
And the license is MIT (meaning you can use it freely in commercial games - but please donate something to him if you can afford it)
One method, which, I'll add, is rarely the most efficient, is to build the level in reverse.
It's fairly simple to do in this case though. You just start with nothing and add clickable groups with some randomness... I say some randomness, as you may need to add extra blocks to make sure all columns are filled.
But thinking about it, even then there's a possibility two clickable groups you add will touch each other and cause an unforeseen collapse, resulting in an unfinishable game. So this method wouldn't guarantee a solvable game.
You could have a look at the source for an open source version like Same GNOME and see how they do it (if they do it at all!)
create a "solved" board, and then change it using N valid but random backwards moves. After adding each backward move, you could run the moves forward (on a temp board) to verify a solvable puzzle.
If you can't run a verification algorithm, because of time constraints, perhaps what you need to work with is a library of puzzles. You can have a background thread generating new random puzzles all the time, and running a verification algorithm on them to check if they are valid. When a valid puzzle is found, it is added to your library of puzzles (assuming the same puzzle doesn't already exist).
Then your game just loads randomly from the library. This allows you to ensure you always have valid puzzles, but still allows you to randomly generate them and verify them without slowing down the puzzle-loading.
I think the best way is, if you generate a level randomly, I mean add 1 or more blocks at the same time to the same column, so you're gonna have some connecting blocks. Then you write a simple solving algorithm, which just solves the board till there is no more possible moves. Then you just simply try to complete the remaining part, just pushing some blocks from the top so that you have some more blocks to vanish. You continue till you finish the board.
You store the pieces you added in another matrix.
After that you just have to add the 2nd matrix to the 1st from the top. If the board is not full, you simply complete the board with blocks to start with(connecting blocks).