Difference between revisions of "Talk:MessageBox Tutorial"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Haama |
imported>ShadowDancer (GameMode blocks vs. spell scripts) |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:--[[User:Haama|Haama]] 16:47, 24 August 2007 (EDT) | :--[[User:Haama|Haama]] 16:47, 24 August 2007 (EDT) | ||
::I can agree that an activator can be superior in certain instances. However, there is one major problem with activators that does not show up in spell scripts - Numerous [[GameMode]] blocks. In my opinion, it would be easier to write a spell script, and have the activator cast it in some instances, in order to reduce the number of '''GameMode''' blocks that are constantly running. In a larger mod (or in multiple mods), this could cause slow down if there are enough '''GameMode''' blocks running, even with '''Return''' statements (although it would admittedly be a huge number of '''GameMode''' blocks). | |||
::--[[User:ShadowDancer|ShadowDancer]] 00:37, 25 August 2007 (EDT) |
Revision as of 23:37, 24 August 2007
OK, what exactly is there on here that is potentially wrong information? I admit to not having gone through it thoroughly since I am not up to date on all of the problems in dealing with messageboxes, although I have corrected the spell script menu thing (and linked within the article to the appropriate section). I do think that the scripting seems to be unnecessarily complicated, but I haven't done much with messageboxes.
--ShadowDancer 14:11, 24 August 2007 (EDT)
- Just the one problem, and it only comes up if you have the activator do more than move back to the starting cell when everything ends (Choosing == 0). I've used all of this in my mods, so I know that every part works (barring typos, but I've cut and paste quite a bit of this into new mods without problems). I know it's complex, but that's what makes it bulletproof, expandable, and a template for any menu system.
- More general - I (well, I wouldn't mind help) keep putting aside rewriting this, because, well, I do have to rewrite it (different flow, examples, etc.). Until then, while I very reluctantly agree that the different versions of the script need to be done (spell, quest, token), I think it would be easier to keep them in an external link, with an explanation of the difference between the activator and spell version, as the flow is supposed to work towards one all-purpose script.
- Let me know what you think about that setup (I'll help anyway I can)
- I had purposely avoided quests, spells, and tokens. There's nothing they can do that an activator can't, and activators are simply superior - quest variables can be reset (StartQuest on an already running quest will reset the variables, and I've heard that adding new variables requires resetting the quest, though that's unverified and there are other possible explanations), tokens can't keep persistent variables, and spells are simply a pain (duration, etc.). The cost - having to move the activator around. It's a bit moot anyway, as people keep asking for the different versions.
- --Haama 16:47, 24 August 2007 (EDT)
- I can agree that an activator can be superior in certain instances. However, there is one major problem with activators that does not show up in spell scripts - Numerous GameMode blocks. In my opinion, it would be easier to write a spell script, and have the activator cast it in some instances, in order to reduce the number of GameMode blocks that are constantly running. In a larger mod (or in multiple mods), this could cause slow down if there are enough GameMode blocks running, even with Return statements (although it would admittedly be a huge number of GameMode blocks).
- --ShadowDancer 00:37, 25 August 2007 (EDT)