Unless you mean just in the movement controller without the vector maths, just to see the effect?
Blackboards? And yeah essentially, in the movementcomponent. But this would be way back, probably even before the aimingcomponent.
Being the effect + the obvious problems with not doing movement via physics.
Edit: So the structure would look something like
- Landscape
- Setting up tank
- Basic controls with turret & camera rotation bound to mouse/thumbstick movement
- UI/Projectile
- AI
- Aiming/ better movement
That way you have the basics of a playable game earlier and would be more fun IMO as right now thereās about 50 or so lectures and only just getting to the stage of a playable game.
2 Likes
That video made me laugh!
1 Like
When Iāve finished editing-out my coughs there will be just one new video for you today.
Production has started today, using enumerations to control the crosshair colour next.
Clicking promote to variable/local variable seems like a better option than Select Color. Seems like it might be confusing to use Select Color when youāre not actually using it for itās intended usage.
Thanks as always Dan. Can you show me a screenshot of this working in Blueprint, with single nodes for the color source, whilst still being able to use the color picker?
Same as any other blueprint variable, just create it, compile the blueprint, then set a default. Though unless you have plans to use them outside of this bind function, just right click the pin and promote to local variable.
Also make sure you set the alpha to 1, didnāt realise it at first when the second and third states didnāt default to that.
I see, thanks. Iāll stick with the way I did it because I like to see the colors actually connected to the Selector in the diagram, so itās super visual what colour relates to what state. Keeping things designer friendly
Wanted to get the debugger video out too today, but another big prevented it. No worries, will do over the weekend and it will be better for it.
Two new meaty architecture videos today. Udemy have taken literally all day not to proces the videos so far, but theyāre on their way and Iāll annount on https://twitter.com/GameDevTV and the Facebook group when done.
1 Like
Very true, thanks again. My first port of call is to make the BP so simple we donāt need crossed-lines. Iām also concerned that re-route nodes make the BP harder to re-arrange, so are best used once the BP design iteration has slowed-down.
Iāll introduce these shortly on your advice, however, to tidy things that are simplified and settled.
Pretty sure youāre missing an answer here for question 7ā¦
Also you put ādosesā instead of does for the dot product or cross product question.
Was only planning for 3, is that weird when itās usually 4?
Thanks re the other issue
All fixed, I see what you mean about the question now. Thanks
Out with the old architectureā¦
In with the newā¦
Code analysis and architecture video coming soon.
Itās looking like 4 new videos today, when Udemy finally process them. I have no control over that bit, but will keep checking until I canāt keep my eyes open anymore.
Iām not really seeing the point of the AimingComponent in this version. Before it was so you could apply it to any vehicle you might want to make but now with the way you have set it up, it will pretty much only work with tanks or tank like vehicles, so why not just have it as part of the Tank code rather than a component. Seems a bit unnecessary now.
Edit: Now Iām about a minute into L167 and you say youāre basically going to move everything from the Tank to the AimingComponent, so still not sure why it exists instead of just being part of the Tank.
Hi Dan, itās mostly an exercise in component architecture, and more importantly the skill of refactoring.
It could indeed be part of the tank, however I want to reinforce components ready for the next section.