|
| 02 May 2015 10:10 AM |
So I have a gem set up that looks like this
--server --Tools for all the shops etc...
--Client -- Tools that the client have etc...
Problem is I want to save the tools the client has.
I have it in a folder under another folder called client with this structure
--Client --Client_scripts(only thing being saved here are values, i can do that) --Items(I need all of the models, folder, everything in here saved) --etc..
I could save this using data persistence, but with less support for it day after day. I would like to use DataStore.
But I have not found anything on doing this. Anyhelp? knowing roblox its probly some easy command like items = itemsfolder:GetChildern() items:Save() or whatever.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| 02 May 2015 05:15 PM |
| Why save the instances when you could just save their values? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 02 May 2015 05:18 PM |
I worded "instance" a bit weridly. I used it in the since of a language like "JAVA" and not roblox. I mean "instance" as a game object.
Example: Save a tool, or a model. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 02 May 2015 05:21 PM |
| I know what you meant but instances. What I'm saying is you don't need to save the instances themselves, just their values. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 02 May 2015 05:22 PM |
| If you need to save a tool, you should be able to just use a BoolValue that is true if the player has the tool or false if the player does not. If you need to save a dynamic model (i.e. the player can change the model) using datastores, you would have to create a function that can convert all of the parts of a model into a table of some sort. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 02 May 2015 06:00 PM |
| So in other words, your saying roblox ditched Data persistence for a less effective/less efficient way of storeing? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 10:35 AM |
| bump --4 (has to be a better way) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 10:37 AM |
| What? DataStores are way more effective, way better, and way more efficient. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 01:08 PM |
Datastores PLUSES: More secure NEGATIVES Harder to use, cannot store instances. Less effective at storing values.
Litterly just a few things i named in 5 seconds. So how is it better? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Tynezz
|
  |
| Joined: 28 Apr 2014 |
| Total Posts: 4945 |
|
|
| 03 May 2015 01:12 PM |
DataStore>Data Persistence
Just save the tool names and then clone them once the player joins. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
97neko
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Sep 2014 |
| Total Posts: 16159 |
|
|
| 03 May 2015 01:37 PM |
use a table and give every tool a specific value, like
weaponIds = { Sword = 1, Rifle = 2, Shotgun = 3, }
and save the values |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 01:37 PM |
| That's actually A very good idea. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 01:40 PM |
| They're both good ideas. However the first one will probably have less code envolved, so less laggy. Although the second one seems more logical, and smart. Hmmm |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 01:40 PM |
| Maybe if you actually knew how to script you wouldn't have difficulty using Datastores considering that they're not at all difficult to use and there is literally a Wiki article that explains how to use them. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 01:46 PM |
Thats the most childish thing I have ever heard.
"Learn how to script." I know every major programming language except objective c, and c++..
"Wiki explains how to do it" So me the wikialink that explains how to save an entire folder full on instances.
"they're not at all difficult to use" Never said the were "difficult" said they were harder then data persistence? because they are?... Datastore is more table based, and I dont like using arrays, or tables..
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 01:47 PM |
show* and other corrections...
I apparently don't know English either... |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
97neko
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Sep 2014 |
| Total Posts: 16159 |
|
|
| 03 May 2015 02:03 PM |
"Thats the most childish thing I have ever heard." Hyperbole indicates stupidity
"I know every major programming language except objective c, and c++.." arrogance indicates stupidity
"So me the wikialink that explains how to save an entire folder full on instances." you don't need one, learn to use a brain and use my idea.
"Never said the were "difficult" said they were harder then data persistence? because they are?... Datastore is more table based, and I dont like using arrays, or tables.."
no... no they're not...
I want to help you, but even if they're insulting you, just take it, most people on here are trolls who can't actually script, themselves. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 02:13 PM |
"Hyperbole indicates stupidity" Wasn't a hyperbole? it was...
"arrogance indicates stupidity" he said learn how to program? i was stating i do by indicating of what i know?
"you don't need one, learn to use a brain and use my idea." He said there is a wiki link. Asking him were it was?
"no... no they're not..."
yes.. yes they are...
Data persistence may have had more lines of code, but it was cleaner. and smarter?
"I want to help you, but even if they're insulting you, just take it, most people on here are trolls who can't actually script, themselves."
No sh*t... Why do you think I responded that way I dead? most "trolls" don't even troll. Trolling is convincing a person to do something stupid. Like deleting system32.. That's why i responded that way. Depicting the illogical, and fatalistically incorrect argument... |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
97neko
|
  |
| Joined: 14 Sep 2014 |
| Total Posts: 16159 |
|
|
| 03 May 2015 02:19 PM |
"Data persistence may have had more lines of code, but it was cleaner."
Cleaner and More lines are contradictory
Instance.new("Reply",Forum.Thread) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 02:25 PM |
Not necessarily.
Example. (This isnt a real language or anything like that)
local bob get:all() while true do if bob.Update = true then restore() end wait(.25) end
There would be many better ways to do that, whatever it is lol. You could get all of them in a array and convert them into different variables. Then wait for each variable to be Updated whatever that means lol... It makes more sense, cleaner, and more flexable. Because now instead of all the varibles being one giant thing of data, they're all there own little bits of data. Meaning easier to manipulate. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 03 May 2015 02:27 PM |
| Less laggy aswell, because now instead of having 4 loops checking, possibly hundreds of variables, every second. You have a simple function or whatever you use checking for each varible being updated.. meaning you could have only 3 variables being checked for an update. And not hundreds.. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|