In the end, it’s still a bug, and bugs should get fixed. The sooner the better xD
both sides, ( yours and Crosby’s ) make sense, but for HS ThT has the final say, personally I think ID is more efficient. But THT built HS so they probably have a better viewpoint of this bug and the solution.
lol, so true
I agree 100% with you on that statement.
I guess it’s emailing time!
maybe link this whole topic in the email, for further reference on ThT’s behalf
I’m answering their survey rn
What do you mean? They added it for a reason, it’s more convenient if you want to code multiple menus then if you have them all on one scene for lots of people (which is why you see so many people do it), everyone brain works differently so just because you find it easier to have everything in one block, to lots of people who don’t think the same way they might be overwhelmed and cluttered. It also makes it a lot easier for some people to look at your code and find stuff.
Scenes are for convenience, so how would being a more experienced coder have anything to do with that? It is true that some experienced coders use one scene, because like I said, everyone thinks differently. Some people think it’s convenient to use an object for their whole game, some like to use one scene, some like to use scenes, and some people use a ton! It just depends on how you believe the most efficient way to code is. There is no “better” way.
Now talking about the issue, I think this is a annoying bug, I don’t completely understand the full grasp on how serious it is as I usually don’t run into this but I think this would also be super hard for THT to fix.
Also to the people I’m quoting, I’m seriously not trying to be rude, it’s just disrespectful to call someone an inexperienced coder because they code a certain way. (I’ve revised the post to make it polite before posting, I just get worried that I might come off as rude when I’m trying to ask people to do the opposite, contradicting my point).
To not hurt other peoples feelings I would recommend editing and deleting parts of previous posts so other can’t see them.
I’m not a leader/mod so I can’t tell you what to do, but just a suggestion.
YESSSSS thank you! That is kinda what I also wanted to say xD
ALSO mr. ClownPig did not call anyone inexperienced, he specified that in the post, just saying
Although it was never directly stated, saying “for more experienced coders” is saying that people who have more experience don’t need scenes. Inferring that unexperienced coders only need scenes.
please don’t call me that lol
The email was received!!!
I just tested it out and agree that the behaviour, as it is, is confusing.
Just to check that I understand:
Basically when you duplicate scenes, it makes new copies of all the objects in the new scene too.
However, if you have code saying “Bear’s X position” in the original scene, this reference will stay the same in the new scene, despite there being a new duplicate of Bear called “Bear 2”.
We would need some time to consider what would be the best way to resolve this, but I appreciate the solutions that you’ve brought up too:
Yay! Thanks for noticing!
After some thinking for this:
I think that it would make sense to update the references in this case, because all of the objects in the previous scene will not be present in the new scene. Basically considering the same thing mentioned here:
And yep objects do all have unique IDs, but for users, distinguishing by name is more straightforward as @/Crosbyman64 mentioned. If you have a bunch of square objects, I guess theoretically you could let users name them all squares. But it becomes difficult to figure out which is which when reading variables in others’ code.
(Square 3) X position and (Square 4) X position
These are clearly different objects.
(Square) X position and (Square) X position
These could be the same object or totally different objects if you allow duplicate names.
Currently the duplication for objects was set up for the context of duplicating within a scene. So these factors hadn’t been considered before when duplicating objects across scenes. We appreciate all the perspectives that everyone has outlined here.
What I meant was that you could have a “Square” on the first scene and then have another “Square” on the second scene, there is no need for a 2 on the second scene
How’s the progress on the issue?