lol, that was suprisingly simple. Thanks!
It's interesting but I've created a full on platform engine and state system, and yet somehow, such simple math still seems to escape me. D:
Anyway, I also just wanted to say that even if you might not want to do too much work for people in order to encourage them to learn, you may want to rethink that attitude. Like me, some people just want to make cool games but don't quite have certain skills yet or simply don't have the time to learn them. For example, I'm just an art guy, not a computer scientist. Though game design and game art tend to be my specialty, it's tough learning everything you need to know to make games work the way you might envision them without the gritty experience of intense programming. The good thing about code (in my opinion) vs art is that, unlike a complex piece of art, complex code can be reused a lot if it's designed well. One RPG textbox differs greatly to another in terms of appearance for example, but, in functionality, as long as the same features are there in some form, they can still work the same way, even if those features are placed in very different places on the screen or have different graphics associated with them. If you program well, you probably tend to modularize your code for later use. Lay out the groundwork like you've done here, and show people how it works, and others will very likely pick it up and expand upon it if they have the knowledge. That means if someone does something cool with your stuff, you've successfully taught them something rather than just expecting them to want to learn on their own something that wasn't exactly made to help them and be disappointed when they don't make something very cool with your stuff.
People don't buy games because they don't know how to make their own, they buy games to use them as a source of fun. However, if they play games a lot, they might actually want to learn how to make them too, which is a LOT harder to do than simply playing them. A lot of awesome software is made on this forum by seeing flaws and bugs with other attempts at doing the same thing. In fact, you kind of gave me the right direction to finish up my own RPG system with after looking over yours and thinking about the features it needed. Thanks to you sharing your knowledge with me, I'm actually able to do it using some of your ideas to do it better than I might have done it on my own. Sharing knowledge is better than doing something for people, but, thanks to you doing both, I came up with a pretty decent system using some of your physical example as a base for some of my own ideas. If you don't want to release your source for that animated textbox, that's cool, but since my system isn't an action library, you've got free reign to release the best one out there for people to use -- if you wanted to of course.
Anyway, sorry for lecturing you. I guess I just feel pretty strongly about allowing people to learn by example, and I feel that, if your example isn't as good as it could be, it kind of defeats the purpose. Sure you may create the best RPG stuff anyone can use, but the stuff they could learn about displaying the messages, such as positioning, string manipulation, message organization, etc. would be pretty invaluable to other aspects of making a game as well - far outside the scope of simple RPG textbox stuff. It all really depends upon the level of the user and the uniqueness of your concept and/or method of doing something. Either way, that's just my two cents. Take it however you wish.
Edited by Ace, 14 February 2010 - 12:24 AM.