Is r.u.b.e. suitable for my project?

[StringKiller]

Hello guys,

I've been looking for a nice level editor for a game to save me the trouble of making one and R.U.B.E. looks really promising but although I've seen plenty of videos I still don't know if this software has all the functions that I need (I will test the trial version if rube has those functions).

As a map creator using images R.u.b.e. is really good and also it would allow me to simulate physics such as wind on trees and different moveable parts but I'm worried about possible item clogs when you are trying to make a really complex map.

I want to make layered parallax maps so I would need a way to show or hide some of the objects just to make editing the map easier so, Is it possible to hide or show objects with a certain layer or property using rube? Has anyone tried this making this type of map in any side-scroller or platformer game?

Thanks a lot in advance.

[iforce2d]

(I will test the trial version if rube has those functions).

Seems like that defeats the purpose of having a trial

I'm worried about possible item clogs when you are trying to make a really complex map.

There is a trial version if you want to... oh... right. I'm assuming that by 'clogs' you mean that the performance of the program might get sluggish? That will depend on the performance of the computer you use it on, so the only way to check for sure is to give it a try. You can use this script to make a scene with 100 bodies and 50 joints. Adjust the sideDimension value to make more, but remember the numbers can quickly get beyond a reasonable number for the physics simulation to run. (This script is intended to be run on a new empty scene - running it once, undoing and running again will work but the joints will not be created because the bodies will have different ids.)

Code: Select all

string bDef = '{"type":"dynamic","awake":true}';
string cDef = '{"density":1,"shapes":[{"radius":0.4,"type":"circle"}],"vertices":{"x":[0],"y":[0]}}';
string sDef = '{"density":1,"shapes":[{"type":"polygon"}],"vertices":{"x":[-0.4,0.4,0.4,-0.4],"y":[-0.4,-0.4,0.4,0.4]}}';

//make some bodies
int sideDimension = 10;
int c = 0;
for (int x = 0; x < sideDimension; x++) {
	for (int y = 0; y < sideDimension; y++) {
		body b = addBody(-1, bDef);
		if ( y == 0 )
			b.setType(0);
		b.setPos( x, y );
		b.setAngle( c );
		fixture f = b.addFixture(-1, (c % 3 == 0) ? sDef : cDef );
		c++;
	}
}

//make some joints
for (int i = 1; i < sideDimension * sideDimension; i+=2) {
	body bA = getBody(i);
	body bB = getBody(i+1);
	if ( bA.getType() == 0 && bB.getType() == 0 )
		continue;
	if ( abs( bA.pos.y - bB.pos.y ) > 2 )
		continue;
	addJoint(-1, '{"type":"distance","bodyA":'+bA.id+',"bodyB":'+bB.id+',"anchorA":{"x":0,"y":0},"anchorB":{"x":0,"y":0},"length":1}' );
}

You might also like to take a look at this entry from the development log when I was worrying about this same thing myself: http://www.iforce2d.net/b2deditor-pro-d ... 2012-05-06

About layers, RUBE does not have any decent support for layers yet. You might be able to get by with custom properties, and scripts to shift everything with certain custom properties off screen temporarily, but that's a bit clunky. Proper layers will be added in future, but I can't give a timeframe for that.

[StringKiller]

I didn't mean perfomance issues, I meant actual usability issues.
I've tested the trial version and although is an amazing physics editor it is a bit stressful if you want to have a really complex scene art-wise. Even when using scripts to move "layers" around when you are not using them it is a bit of pain when you are trying to make a scene with 4 parallarx layers in the background and one or two in the front since everything overlaps.
Definitively I'll wait a bit for starting projects with a lot of layers with moveable objects and I'll try to use R.U.B.E to make the main terrain and add static parallax layers with something else since this software is really good.
I'll have patience and wait for future features in this, I believe it is gonna be great when you can use it easier from an artist point of view.

Thanks for your answer!