On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:31, James Paige <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 08:20:11AM -0500, Kizul Emeraldfire wrote:
> >    On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:59, James Paige <[email protected]>
> >    wrote:
> >
> >      After Lucier posted this mockup:
> >      http://i658.photobucket.com/albums/uu304/rlb1626/genesis0055.png
> >
> >      I wrote this plan:
> >
> http://gilgamesh.hamsterrepublic.com/wiki/ohrrpgce/index.php/Plan_for_bigger_walkabouts
> >
> >      And when I thought about it, it sounds super-easy. Like I am talking
> >      less than a weekends' worth of work with no obvious technical
> hurdles. I
> >      thought I would reproduce the  plan here for quick discussion:
> >
> >      ----
> >
> >      Right now, walkabout sprites are limited to 20x20.
> >
> >      What if we simply added a new sprite type?
> >
> >      .PT9      big walkabouts     32 x 40 x 12       640 x 12 = 7680
> >
> >      The size would be the same as hero graphics (for the benefit of
> people
> >      who want to synch battle/walkabout graphics FF6-style). There would
> be 3
> >      frames in each direction.
> >
> >      Or alternatively we might go with
> >
> >      .PT9      big walkabouts     40 x 40 x 12       800 x 12 = 9600
> >
> >      Which could still be used the same way, but would allow for squarish
> >      "boss" npcs with only minor pixel wasteage.
> >
> >      In the NPC editor, and the hero editor we would add an additional
> data
> >      element for walkabout sprite size 0=small, 1=large. (this would work
> >      just like the sprite size setting for enemies)
> >
> >      Big NPCs would be drawn on the map with their bottom center in the
> same
> >      place as the bottom-center of small NPCs. There would be no special
> >      passability considerations for big walkabout sprites, they would
> still
> >      use 20x20 passability squares. (any change to that behavior would
> belong
> >      in Plan for non-tile-based walking)
> >
> >      Ideally we want some future version to allow total flexability in
> sprite
> >      sizes, but this plan would be super-easy to implement, and would
> only
> >      add a very small additional backcompat burden (no worse than what
> >      already exists for enemy graphics)
> >
> >      ---
> >      James
> >
> >    <insert request for sprites of a user-defined size like 20 *40 or 40
> *20>
> >
> >    *hope, hope* :D
>
> That is something we want to allow in the future, but this plan seemed
> quick and easy, whereas user-defined sizes is harder, and will take more
> time to get right.
>
> ---
> James
>

Ahh, I see.

Hrm. Well, I WAS going to ask if it be too hard to implement 20x30 as an
additional (non-user-defined) size (like old NES/SNES games with big
sprites, it'd be one-and-a-half tiles tall instead of just one, or two full
ones — I think Dragon Quest VI (for the Super Famicom), among other games,
uses sprites of similar ratios for the main heroes and NPCs), but then I got
to thinking about it and, since they'd be one-and-a-half tiles tall, moving
in one-tile steps would be a tad strange; they probably wouldn't mesh up
with the walls right in areas.

So, instead: when you guys DO get around to implementing arbitrary,
user-defined sprite-sizes, any chance of an arbitrary, user-defined 'step'
(defined in pixels; defaulted to '20') as well? :)
_______________________________________________
Ohrrpgce mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.motherhamster.org/listinfo.cgi/ohrrpgce-motherhamster.org

Reply via email to