(01-25-2013, 01:14 AM)Phaze Wrote: Funny, the tool I'm going to be making is general purpose and has a lot of features like your own, but it'll be based on individual parts/tiles assembled into their own frames. It will also have support for making separate 'transformation animations' that will be applied in a game implementing the formats. Stuff like rotation, skewing, color scaling.
I had that idea a long time ago. But I figured it'd be easier to make a skeletal animation editor and engine to handle frame-based animation along with composited parts and key transformations.
Phaze Wrote:Collisions aren't going to be a thing handled in the animator though, I plan to leave that in the engine in order to separate presentation from technical details.
I think you miss understood me or im just a bit sleepy. My sprite animator doesn't do anything with collisions. I actually left that part, transforming the collisions, up to my entities' animatedCollision component. All it does is ensure that the collision polygons are correctly transformed with the entity and current frame without actually doing collisions.
Phaze Wrote:About the level editor, it'll depend if your tool will easily support a top-down perspective, all sorts of fancy stuff on tiles/collision and either an explicit partitioning of area data (quadtree) or a quadtree friendly implementation that can easily be partitioned as such.
Im not sure i understand what you're saying. A top-down perspective is created through game and art design. What's a level editor need a quadtree for? -placing a quadtree and setting a size? Then should it just be interpreted from the output from a rectangle and a special name or something. Unless you meant for optimal rendering, then i understand, but then it would have no real use to the output data. Im sorry, but im not really sure what you meant by any of that last part.