blockoo
|
  |
| Joined: 08 Nov 2007 |
| Total Posts: 17202 |
|
|
| 17 Dec 2011 04:38 PM |
It seems long overdue. You'd only need 1 angle though, since GUIs can only rotate along one axis.
GUI.Rotation = 110 --degrees |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
LocalChum
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Mar 2011 |
| Total Posts: 6906 |
|
| |
|
blockoo
|
  |
| Joined: 08 Nov 2007 |
| Total Posts: 17202 |
|
|
| 17 Dec 2011 05:08 PM |
| If they come out with it, just expect it to be degrees because little kiddies won't know how to use radians. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 17 Dec 2011 05:24 PM |
| Considering everything else uses radians, and math.rad(degrees) is simple enough to use, my bet is on radians IF they actually get around to making this. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Oysi
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Jul 2009 |
| Total Posts: 9058 |
|
| |
|
|
| 17 Dec 2011 05:34 PM |
| True, but that implies they already know radians =D |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Oysi
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Jul 2009 |
| Total Posts: 9058 |
|
| |
|
blockoo
|
  |
| Joined: 08 Nov 2007 |
| Total Posts: 17202 |
|
|
| 17 Dec 2011 05:43 PM |
| Degrees, radians, it doesn't really matter. It's the feature that counts. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Oysi
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Jul 2009 |
| Total Posts: 9058 |
|
| |
|
pwnedu46
|
  |
| Joined: 23 May 2009 |
| Total Posts: 7534 |
|
|
| 17 Dec 2011 06:11 PM |
"The current single biggest limitation for GUI games is rotation of course. I am talking to JediTkaCheff on that one. But not a priority of course. It might happen :) " -- Sorcus
---------- ~ pwnedu46, the unicorn ~ |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
iamogggg
|
  |
| Joined: 09 Sep 2008 |
| Total Posts: 642 |
|
|
| 17 Dec 2011 08:17 PM |
| No, not just one rotational direction. We need to have 2D objects rotate on three axes, just to screw with everyone. :D |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
br45entei
|
  |
| Joined: 06 Nov 2010 |
| Total Posts: 1058 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 12:51 AM |
@iamogggg; I lol'd.
@OP; This would (will?) be very cool.
~entei~ ~ http://www.roblox.com/Secret-item?id=67830298 ~ |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 12:53 AM |
| 1 is fine for me. Really, Jedi dude is planning it. He said 1 thing at a time when I asked him. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
stravant
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 22 Oct 2007 |
| Total Posts: 2893 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 12:55 AM |
| The main question is, where do you rotate around? The center of an object? Then you also need to have supplemental methods to make sense of the rotation, such toObjectSpace, and some useful information on what the bounds of the thing are, since AbsoluteSize / AbsolutePosition wouldn't be enough anymore. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Quenty
|
  |
| Joined: 03 Sep 2009 |
| Total Posts: 9316 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 01:24 AM |
Center of the object when not rotated. Simple enough. We don't necessarily need bounds, ect. We know math.
But yes, those are good points. I just want to be able to rotate stuff.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
stravant
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 22 Oct 2007 |
| Total Posts: 2893 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 01:46 AM |
"We don't necessarily need bounds, ect. We know math."
I don't know about you but I'd rather not have to write a matrix inverse function just in order to convert mouse coordinates into local coords for a rotated thing every time I need them.
If it's going to be added it has to be done right. The current idea is to expose it as a specific new type of Gui, a "sprite" Gui which calculates all of it's things such as size / position relative to a center, which is also the center of rotation, rather than using the normal coordinate system that Guis use. That's really what the desired functionality is anyways, for making sprite-like things, not for rotating existing interfaces. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 05:37 AM |
Note that this wouldnt really work with scale unless you use the XX or YY thingies for the whatever it was named.
With this we could make triangles though using clipsdescendants... ;3
But i bet it would just make guis lag 2x more making us not able to make renderers anymore so we wouldnt do a thing with triangles anymore. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
HatHelper
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 02 Mar 2009 |
| Total Posts: 46305 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 06:13 AM |
gui.RotatePoint = "TopLeft"
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 06:35 AM |
OR they could just add a triangle instance wich we can do anything with.
Properties:
-RenderSpaceOrWatever=CameraSpace/WorldSpace (is it gui or something in de world. Could also be instance so its either part, camera or nil)
-ZTest=true/false (whether its blocked by parts or not)
-Transparency and other appeareance stoof. Should also have the part materials and all.
-Corner1 -Corner2 -Corner3 -DrawBackSurface=true/false -BorderSizePixell0l0l0l -Image=???
k? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 10:31 AM |
| How did mattchewy do that GUI rotation awhile back? |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
stravant
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 22 Oct 2007 |
| Total Posts: 2893 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 11:53 AM |
"gui.RotatePoint = "TopLeft""
That's quite possibly the ugliest thing I've ever seen proposed. Why would you want an un-workable structure like that that would require many many lines of code to do anything with the data in the object. A much more sane solution would be having a UDim property which determines the offset from the top-left if anything. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 12:00 PM |
| @ninja He used local parts with decals |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
HatHelper
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 02 Mar 2009 |
| Total Posts: 46305 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 12:25 PM |
:/ Idk I don't know how the studio works, I just see what anyone can see.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Rob498
|
  |
 |
| Joined: 05 Sep 2008 |
| Total Posts: 42722 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 03:16 PM |
| Maybe they don't think it's neccessary(?) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
NVI
|
  |
| Joined: 11 Jan 2009 |
| Total Posts: 4744 |
|
|
| 18 Dec 2011 03:19 PM |
| It isn't necessary. Maybe they'll add GUI sprites, maybe not. But there is absolutely no reason to extend it to all controls - no one cares for a spinning textbox. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|