of     2   
chevron_rightchevron_rightchevron_right

[rfa#hidefromsearch]
#169186869Wednesday, July 29, 2015 4:24 AM GMT

[rfa#hidefromsearch]
Skebby
#169187542Wednesday, July 29, 2015 4:32 AM GMT

Scriptable, really.
Aelerity
#169195598Wednesday, July 29, 2015 6:28 AM GMT

Scriptiable just do a function on touched (hit) function and do something like game.Workspace.Part.ParticleEmitter.Enabled = true "There's candy in the white van kids!"
Aelerity
#169195640Wednesday, July 29, 2015 6:29 AM GMT

Man, i'm bad at spelling. "There's candy in the white van kids!"
MakerModelLua
#169195699Wednesday, July 29, 2015 6:30 AM GMT

Or make the rock an actual part with a particle emitter in it
DejaVu_Loop
#169197243Wednesday, July 29, 2015 6:57 AM GMT

He means when the particle is touched. It's impossible to accurately predict the exact location of a particle as it spawns randomly on the part surface and the velocity spread value only makes it harder. Not really scriptable in most situations.
Aelerity
#169197301Wednesday, July 29, 2015 6:58 AM GMT

Thats why you make an invisible 1x1x1 block. "There's candy in the white van kids!"
DejaVu_Loop
#169197457Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:01 AM GMT

That wouldn't account for touching the particle, just getting in range of the emitter. Stop trying to prove me wrong and support this guy.
MakerModelLua
#169197643Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:04 AM GMT

Or you can make your own part, make it invisible, then add a billboardgui inside it with an image label of your particle. Then just do your touchee event through the part :)
Aelerity
#169197658Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:04 AM GMT

@Night you can be able to touch a block and it will activate something in another block. "There's candy in the white van kids!"
DejaVu_Loop
#169197960Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:09 AM GMT

But then you lose all that functionality. No spline graph editor, no acceleration property, no color transitioning, no light emission, no more dynamic size and transparency changing, no zindex property... Want me to keep going? Just because something is scriptable doesn't mean we can't make it easier for ourselves.
MakerModelLua
#169198065Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:11 AM GMT

Actually, it's fairly easy to edit every single one of those properties using my billboardgui method
DejaVu_Loop
#169198340Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:16 AM GMT

You do realize that for every particle emitter set up that way you have hundreds of parts containing billboard guis and body movers updating every frame? The particle engine roblox has now can handle large amounts of particles and dynamic changes without much lag.
MakerModelLua
#169198544Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:20 AM GMT

Roblox's engine is actually very good now, and you should give it a little more credit. If your parts have CanCollide to false, and you dispose the parts correctly, you will have minimum frame drops.
DejaVu_Loop
#169198963Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:27 AM GMT

While that may be true, I think we can all agree that the suggested method is both more user-friendly and consistent. If you want to pull an AxisAngle and write a particle engine of your own, that's great. If it actually works, even better. Either way, this is something that would be better suited as a supported feature of the particleEmitter object.
MakerModelLua
#169199127Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:30 AM GMT

Ya, well, particles are 2D and roblox isn't going to add a Touched event(ever) to it. so either use my way or the ways listed above or cry in a corner
instawin
#169199204Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:32 AM GMT

@maker why are you not supporting this idea? a touched event for particles themselves would be awesome, and would be a lot more efficient than creating invisible parts and putting a particle emitter in them, and then detecting touching parts on the invisible part itself. imagine how EASY it would be create even more realistic particles. not to mention, this would benefit everyone else. this .Touched event for particles would allow for MUCH more user friendly scripting. there is no good reason to be opposed to this. it makes literally no sense. it would allow for more possibility for devs.. i'll support
DejaVu_Loop
#169199337Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:34 AM GMT

Well when you think about it, everything on your screen is presented in a 2D form. I'm not sure how they set up their particle engine, but I'm sure it's flexible enough to detect basic collisions.
MakerModelLua
#169199600Wednesday, July 29, 2015 7:39 AM GMT

No it's not. You would have to give 2D particles 3D space, and allow them to collide and be altered by physics. Sound familiar? Kind of like my invisible brick trick...
[rfa#hidefromsearch]
#169301346Thursday, July 30, 2015 2:57 AM GMT

[rfa#hidefromsearch]
DejaVu_Loop
#169304083Thursday, July 30, 2015 3:26 AM GMT

Particles do have 3D space of some sort. The acceleration property moves the particles in a global direction. They even said in one of their old wiki articles that their particles are very like billboard guis.
MakerModelLua
#169304766Thursday, July 30, 2015 3:33 AM GMT

Then use my method...
Astreastela
#169307678Thursday, July 30, 2015 4:04 AM GMT

I support. More scripting possibilities.
CitadelofFire
#169371952Thursday, July 30, 2015 7:46 PM GMT

You can script this pretty easily, though it would be a lot more useful. Support.
MartienBecker
#195957566Friday, August 12, 2016 2:04 AM GMT

Youtube

    of     2   
chevron_rightchevron_rightchevron_right