bug - object don't appear overtop

[mobius]

I attached the level where I noticed this. Note the eyes of the sphnix object are partly covering the terrain sphinx. It's set to no-overwrite and I can press bring to front. In the editor it looks correct but when playtesting it appears BEHIND.

This seems to be specific to this object for some reason. As the pillar traps in this same level work correctly.

[Nepster]

Yes, this is a bug and I can reproduce this. The cause is, that the sphinx eyes is a movable background now and thus is drawn below everything else.

The fix will be rather elaborate, so might take a while.

[mobius]

a similar/related issue (I'm guessing). The Christmas ornaments when set to "only on terrain" aren't displaying correctly on this level. They seem to behave just like the sphinx eyes.

[Nepster]

Yeah, that's the same bug, the same cause and the same result.

I managed to change this to the following behavior:
Movable background objects (which are basically every deco piece) are still drawn below all other terrain and interactive objects. The only exceptions are movable background objects with the "only-on-terrain" flag. These are drawn above the terrain now.
I adapted the editor rendering to produce the same output.

So please change the sphinx eyes to be only-on-terrain, which makes sense anyway. Then this will be fine graphically from the next update on.

[mobius]

Why exactly are these objects classified as "movable background"? Is it for ease; having less categories of objects? I'm okay with that. Because otherwise I wouldn't call them "backgrounds" although... maybe the distinction does make sense in some cases like the clouds in the Shadow set... But not with the sphinx eyes.

BTW: what's with the "do NOT use" tag when hovering over these objects in the panel of the editor?

[Simon]

History: NL had decoration, a.k.a. no-effect gadget. Deco was drawn on top of terrain every time. Some decoration even looked like terrain, e.g., trees and lampposts in L2 shadow. Very enraging, and Nepster eventually commented these tiles with "do NOT use" in their text-format conversions.

Fast-forward a year: IchoTolot clarified the tiles. Some of the confusing decoration is now animated, some others are replaced by proper terrain. Movable background has always been drawn behind the terrain, where most decoration should belong, too. This made decoration a special kind of moving background, moving at speed 0.

Moving background isn't a good name anymore, most tiles will be set still. The name is for clarity during conversion. "do NOT use" should vanish once the trees animate clearly.

-- Simon

[IchoTolot]

History: NL had decoration, a.k.a. no-effect gadget. Deco was drawn on top of terrain every time. Some decoration even looked like terrain, e.g., trees and lampposts in L2 shadow. Very enraging, and Nepster eventually commented these tiles with "do NOT use" in their text-format conversions.

Fast-forward a year: IchoTolot clarified the tiles. Some of the confusing decoration is now animated, some others are replaced by proper terrain. Movable background has always been drawn behind the terrain, where most decoration should belong, too. This made decoration a special kind of moving background, moving at speed 0.

Moving background isn't a good name anymore, most tiles will be set still. The name is for clarity during conversion. "do NOT use" should vanish once the trees animate clearly.

-- Simon

The trees, lamps and staffs already should animate clearly in the newest exp versions.
I just now read about the "do NOT use" tag and honestly it kind of bothers me. I find this tag way more confusing for players and designers than any form of decorative objects could ever be. Why should the designer may not use decoration? It can be slightly confusing for some people when not used correctly, but recommend not using them entirely is just a ridiculous overreaction. I suggest a quick removal of the "do NOT use" tag as it's more of a personal rant than help for the user.

EDIT: Even before my clarifying tileset patches that Simon described: A decorative object that's placed in a confusing manner can be clarified with one press of the true physics key or at first interaction with it. A "do NOT use" tag just leaves questions that only can be clarifiyed by asking the person who put in the tag  -- a way more annoying task. And of course most users won't see any good reason not to use them or just ask why.

[Nepster]

Why exactly are these objects classified as "movable background"? Is it for ease; having less categories of objects? I'm okay with that. Because otherwise I wouldn't call them "backgrounds" although... maybe the distinction does make sense in some cases like the clouds in the Shadow set... But not with the sphinx eyes.

Yes, my plan is that all decorative pieces are of one and the same object type. That makes it a lot easier to handle them in the code. And as movable background objects offer the most options for level designers, I use them for this purpose. That said: Yes, the name no longer perfectly mirrors the usage now, but I fear changing the name of this object type now will only add confusion.
The currently existing decoration objects, are only a relic from the old days, that are still needed for exit tops due to the limitations regarding multiple animations for objects. My long-term goal is to remove this class of objects completely.

BTW: what's with the "do NOT use" tag when hovering over these objects in the panel of the editor?

That's a relic from the good old days, when I thought this would basically be my private editor or perhaps an alternative to an official new-formats editor by namida. I simply forgot to change that to a more neutral description. Thanks for notifying me of this bug.

[mobius]

Why exactly are these objects classified as "movable background"? Is it for ease; having less categories of objects? I'm okay with that. Because otherwise I wouldn't call them "backgrounds" although... maybe the distinction does make sense in some cases like the clouds in the Shadow set... But not with the sphinx eyes.

Yes, my plan is that all decorative pieces are of one and the same object type. That makes it a lot easier to handle them in the code. And as movable background objects offer the most options for level designers, I use them for this purpose. That said: Yes, the name no longer perfectly mirrors the usage now, but I fear changing the name of this object type now will only add confusion.
The currently existing decoration objects, are only a relic from the old days, that are still needed for exit tops due to the limitations regarding multiple animations for objects. My long-term goal is to remove this class of objects completely.

-why not calling something like "miscellaneous moving objects/ or decorative objects". I don't see why this would be confusing.

-Can regular backgrounds not fit in the same category as moving?

-booooo, removing decoration! If it's not confusing or gets in the way; it's not bad. The sphynx eyes for example; I've only ever used it in an area of the level in which you can't reach anyway. I'm sure I've had this discussion before but I'm strongly against removal. Rather improve decoration that's irritating than remove it. Decoration is always better than bland levels.

[Nepster]

-why not calling something like "miscellaneous moving objects/ or decorative objects". I don't see why this would be confusing.

Yes, we could call it that, but that's a pretty long name

-Can regular backgrounds not fit in the same category as moving?

That's exactly what is happening now: All objects that have been "decoration objects" are now "movable backgrounds".

-booooo, removing decoration! If it's not confusing or gets in the way; it's not bad. The sphynx eyes for example; I've only ever used it in an area of the level in which you can't reach anyway. I'm sure I've had this discussion before but I'm strongly against removal. Rather improve decoration that's irritating than remove it. Decoration is always better than bland levels.

Sorry, but you misunderstood me: The decorative objects are not removed. They are simply "movable background" objects now, instead of "decoration" objects. These are just two types of objects, one of which will be removed at some point. But that does not mean that decorative objects themselves will be removed.