Pop-Spike Issue - Width!?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Pop-Spike Issue - Width!?

Post by Retrocrystallix on Thu Nov 28, 2013 3:15 pm

So the pop-spike: A rather devious piece of equipment that catches unsuspecting racers for its pleasure...

The main concern I have: It's dimensions are incorrect in Designer --- the width cannot be 24 pixels.

A fine example of this is found on the level Crossroads, with the pop spike parts going up and down, forcing the player to wait a certain period of time before going through:

Start spike down: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
End spike down: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Time for some math! Wink
The block length (including the edge blocks) of the top layer platform is 20 block length. Each block is 25 pixel width (you can check in designer if you want) and each pop-spike would be 24 width if you use the designer's spike. There are 21 pop-spikes on that level (again, count them to verify if you want, but I got this answer for multiple people).

25 pixel width/block x 20 blocks = 500 pixel width (for platform)
24 pixel width/pop-spike x 21 pop-spikes = 504 pixel width (for total pop-spike length)

Already, we have problem. Furthermore, if you look at the first pop-spike on the top layer, you see its not on the edge of the first block, but in the sorta "middle", and i got the left edge of the pop-spike is 13 pixels from the left edge of the block (found in designer upon recreating the level). And, the last pop-spike seems to end just before it touches the wall (the block under the right edge block of the platform), meaning that it should even use the 25 pixels of the last spike.

Thus, 500 pixels - 13 pixels (distance from left edge) - about 2 or 3 pixels (distance from left edge of last block to last pop-spike) - 25 pixels (since the last block is not used) = 459 or 460 pixels length to the pop-spikes in the picture.

459 or 460 pixels is clearly less than 504 pixels, a difference of 44 or 45 pixels.

--- After this point it's a rough estimate, I'd like it if someone actually go get the pixel distance of overlap between the first and second pop-spike ^^ ---

And for the last part, take a look at the first picture again. If you look closely between the first and second pop-spikes of the top layer, you'll see a slight overlap (thank god, I thought yck was off by 3 pixels!!!). If you have been following my calculations, I've been assuming that the pop-spikes are side by side, NOT overlapping. However, in the original they overlap slightly, meaning we have to use math once more.

NOTE: For the sake of this discussion, I'll assume that the overlap distance is equal for all spikes, and that the overlap distance between the right edge of the 1st pop-spike (RIGHT edge according to the pic, left edge if you use the shapes not inverted) and the left edge of the 2nd pop-spike is 3 pixels. My argument for this fact that if you look at the picture, the first "peak" of each pop-spike (there are 2 peaks) slightly touches the right edge of the 2nd "peak" of the spike below (look closely for this). This "touching" thing occurs for all the pop-spikes (look even closer now), so I assume equal overlapping distance.

If all the spikes except the first pop-spike are off by 3 pixels, that means we have to move by 3, 6, 9 pixels to the left edge of consecutive pop-spikes:

2nd pop-spike --> 3 pixels right
3rd pop-spike --> 6 pixels right (because you have to move it 3 pixels right, AND you moved the 2nd pop-spike 3 pixels right)
4th pop-spike --> 9 pixels right
...
21st pop-spike ---> 60 pixels right

Thus, you increased the length of distance between the first and last pop-spike by 60 pixels (think about it, it's 60 AND NOT 60+57+...+3), so our new pixel lengths are:

for 459 pixels ---> 459 pixels + 60 pixels = 519 pixels
for 460 pixels ---> 460 pixels + 60 pixels = 520 pixels

FINALLY! This is our correct length from the picture now, time to find the width per each individual pop-spike:

Answer 1) 519 pixels/21 pop-spikes = 24.714... pixels/1 pop-spike (rounded) or 173/7 pixels/1 pop-spike (exact)
Answer 2) 520 pixels/21 pop-spikes = 24.761... pixels/1 pop-spike (rounded) or 520/21 pixels/1 pop-spike (exact.... it can't be reduced anymore)

So rounded to the tenth's place, the width should be about 24.7 or 24.8 pixels in length Wink

*** If anyone finds something wrong with my calculations, PLEASE COMMENT BELOW!!!

Retrocrystallix

Posts : 91
Join date : 2013-07-31
Location : Come and catch me ^.^

Back to top Go down

Re: Pop-Spike Issue - Width!?

Post by Ozone Layer on Fri Nov 29, 2013 2:04 pm

What the fuck are you talking about... xD
Most of us know about the problem, but we don't really need a solution Razz
avatar
Ozone Layer

Posts : 692
Join date : 2013-07-29
Location : Somewhere...

Back to top Go down

Re: Pop-Spike Issue - Width!?

Post by Retrocrystallix on Fri Nov 29, 2013 2:50 pm

Lol all I did was apply a bit of math to the problem.... ^^
It does make re-creating lvls a pain Dx

Retrocrystallix

Posts : 91
Join date : 2013-07-31
Location : Come and catch me ^.^

Back to top Go down

Re: Pop-Spike Issue - Width!?

Post by AngelOfOreos on Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:23 am

Retrocrystallix wrote:It does make re-creating lvls a pain Dx
Indeed. Remaking John's levels has been a hard task so far.

_________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
AngelOfOreos
Cookie
Cookie

Posts : 689
Join date : 2013-09-23
Age : 18
Location : the mountains

Back to top Go down

Re: Pop-Spike Issue - Width!?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum