Reply to Re: Some self-indulgence
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
lack of respect for scripts to be a product and a property in themselves just like graphics or music etc.
scripts are a product in themselves, just like graphics or music. However, like with graphics or music functionality is paramount. If a fantastic looking enemy graphic happens to be twice the size of a screen in Dink then the graphic is flawed. I don't see why scripting would be exempt. In fact, I think for scripts by far the most important property is how well they work. And for a system showing a mouse-based control system how could gameplay be not a part of the workings of the scripts?
Also, if a file is a demonstration file having non-optimalized gameplay makes even less sense. Like I said in my previous post: What's the point of setting up a demonstration that isn't optimalized? That's like letting people taste your new lemonade recipe but pointing out that with a little more sugar it would taste even better. It just doesn't make sense to not add the sugar yourself if you are merely interested in showing people what can be done.
I didn't say like, I didn't say no intention of using, I said no interest.
I might have phrased that wrongly, though in general you'd only be interested in files you'd like. Unless you happen to be sadomasochist.
What I really mean is that you can't redirect all criticism by redefining the purpose of your file. Some basic things that I always look for in development files are usability and ease of use. Failing on those points pretty much always results in a lower score when I review a file. Of course if the scripts need to be very complicated because what you're trying to do is very complicated you'll obviously get some leeway. (Or if doing something in a complicated manner will increase efficiency.) Just saying that your file is a demonstration of functionality doesn't change that. Though I will probably be a little bit more lenient on ease of use and more critical of actual functionality.
And personally I'd describe something that shows that something can be done without doing it itself as a missed opportunity. Like an unfinished lemonade.
Note that I actually liked reading your first post.
scripts are a product in themselves, just like graphics or music. However, like with graphics or music functionality is paramount. If a fantastic looking enemy graphic happens to be twice the size of a screen in Dink then the graphic is flawed. I don't see why scripting would be exempt. In fact, I think for scripts by far the most important property is how well they work. And for a system showing a mouse-based control system how could gameplay be not a part of the workings of the scripts?
Also, if a file is a demonstration file having non-optimalized gameplay makes even less sense. Like I said in my previous post: What's the point of setting up a demonstration that isn't optimalized? That's like letting people taste your new lemonade recipe but pointing out that with a little more sugar it would taste even better. It just doesn't make sense to not add the sugar yourself if you are merely interested in showing people what can be done.
I didn't say like, I didn't say no intention of using, I said no interest.
I might have phrased that wrongly, though in general you'd only be interested in files you'd like. Unless you happen to be sadomasochist.
What I really mean is that you can't redirect all criticism by redefining the purpose of your file. Some basic things that I always look for in development files are usability and ease of use. Failing on those points pretty much always results in a lower score when I review a file. Of course if the scripts need to be very complicated because what you're trying to do is very complicated you'll obviously get some leeway. (Or if doing something in a complicated manner will increase efficiency.) Just saying that your file is a demonstration of functionality doesn't change that. Though I will probably be a little bit more lenient on ease of use and more critical of actual functionality.
And personally I'd describe something that shows that something can be done without doing it itself as a missed opportunity. Like an unfinished lemonade.
Note that I actually liked reading your first post.
