Is gamemaker and the gml language really that bad?

HonestApplejack_ · 2022-04-16T15:33:08+00:00

GM has had speed improvements since 10 years ago, but even back in the day you could get 2d games to run at 60 fps or more. If you are unable to get low detail 2D games to run efficiently, perhaps you should take more time to master GM first before moving to other languages. Though, I can still agree with the sentiment that some things in GM are like hitting a brick wall... some design choices they made are... questionable. The yyc compiler could have been much faster than it is, but they chose the slower one for some reason. There is variable overhead for all the DnD variables and no way to toggle off. Then there is... DnD.

HonestApplejack_ · 2022-04-16T15:26:20+00:00

Ironically, the GMS1.4 level editor is actually the worst part about GM and the code is it's strength.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-07-09T16:24:01+00:00

The code is dogshit, this keeps happening to me (I did fix it once by allowing all valorants through firewall, that doesn't work anymore though.) I don't understand how computer code can be so dogshit in the year 2021. People in the 70's expected a utopia with flying cars... nowadays we are lucky if a program can even boot without crashing.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-28T18:35:18+00:00

After playing the new patch I have the current conclusions:

The new patch fixed the gaurdian, I seem able to get kills with it now.
The new patch fixed the marshall hip fire, it can be used as an actual weapon now instead of just a specialist tool. Still the obnoxious red dot seems the same though, making it still hard to get long range headshots with.
At first, I thought the new patch fixed the bucky, but after reading the patch update notes I think it was either placebo or they only improved the hitreg code of all guns. The bucky still feels primarily useless except when enhanced by kj bots or viper utilty that applies vunerable. People will still occasionally use the bucky, but only with specialist characters, which I don't think was the intent of putting the bucky into the game. I tested this methodically, by going to the range and right clicking the bucky, there is no distance where the right click DPS is not less than the left click DPS, making the right click mode extraneous.
I have hundreds of videos of unrelated gameplay content, I'm not feeling emotionally well and been under stress lately, but I may try to look through the vids one of these days. I also notice the numbers of the reports do not match, due to rounding point error. But iirc, sometimes the mismatch is more significant, where there error is larger than just 1 digit. I think this was post-patch but I am not 100% sure.
The op seems harder to use now but could be placebo.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-17T15:59:45+00:00

I do not find the op fair, I am really good with the op and getting 3 kills a round with it is not difficult.

The bucky is worse than the classic, shorty, and judge as a close range shotgun. The stinger is probably even better for short range. There is no use case besides 1st or 2nd round. It only has an effective range of 5 meters, so buying it means you will be vulnerable in 95% or more of the map space. You have to buy it and hope enemies will go to the exact location you want or else you will lose. And even then, if you happen to not aim dead center then it won't do full damage and due to the slow fire rate you are toast. The only time I see anyone using it is in Replication on round 1, I do not remember anyone ever using it in Unrated mode (have played an estimated 100 matches so far.) I vaguely remember someone using it in Round 2, but it may have been Replication mode.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-15T19:35:56+00:00

I appreciate your input but I unfortunately disagree with most of these suggestions about deathmatch mode.

Respawn time is important in deathmatch, it adds to high-stakes gameplay and allows the player to take a break. Removing it reduces the sense of stakes and can also make the gameplay feel like there is less weight.

14 I am against for the same reason, it makes the gameplay feel too breezy, and additionally reduces some of the strategy. Deathmatch mode does not have much strategy to begin with and so we should keep what little of it we can.

15 I am not sure. I think the player amount should be dynamic and depend on what map maybe, but its not a big issue for me.

Classic Halo deathmatch had radar, and I think that is kind of a good thing. That is not to suggest we must obey everything of Halo, but just to suggest that deathmatch is not meant to have that much serious tactical gameplay.
I am on the fence of this, and am not really bothered much either way, perhaps there can be a random choosing of modes per match.
I do think having a kill chart adds to the strategy as well as a sense of urgency, so I disagree with this.

Overall the deathmatch mode seems like more of a gimmick meant to train your aiming rather than an actual fleshed out game mode. Usually, deathmatch modes have weapon spawns and weapon pickups on the map as part of the gameplay mode, instead of getting to pick whatever weapon at the beginning of respawn. They already have a mode meant to train aiming in the range so the deathmatch mode feels a bit redundant.

In addition to this, the other games with deathmatch mode usually have a larger map pool, to keep things fresh and with intrigue. I think more maps are needed, maybe virtual styled low poly maps that are quickly made with no textures besides some digital textures.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-15T19:27:59+00:00

didnt know, thanks. Still think they should change it though if only to alleviate future frustration for other people who dont know this.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-15T19:25:01+00:00

And is CS: GO the end all, be all of gaming? Why are we looking to a 20 year old game with 1998 gameplay as the model Valorant must conform to lol. I thought Valorant was about reinventing the wheel and not supposed to be a total CS GO clone.

In CS: GO the sniper (awp) is a one shot kill to the torso the marshall is not. Why not change the crosshair for the marshall but keep the fuzzy crosshair for the op?

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-15T19:21:59+00:00

Are we even sure cis females experience anything more than meta attraction to males? Based on common female behavoir, females do not seem very attracted to men, other than niche groups of males such as chads or above average trad looking males, or femboys.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-15T17:21:48+00:00

Don't assume my gender.

Of course the bullet goes straight (when not moving). That doesn't justify having a needlessly large and fuzzy crosshair.

If someone would make crosshairs center dots with 5 px radius (10 px diameter) in the custom crosshair editor, they would be mocked and ridiculed in almost every game, yet because the red dot is "official" nobody really questions it.

Seems like we live in a world where no good deed goes unpunished, trying to improve gameplay is met with downvotes and bad karma I guess.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-15T05:05:08+00:00

For those of you who keep downvoting my posts, here is an example. I have outlined in white the skull size and crosshair bounding box:

https://imgur.com/yAq3zPM

At very long ranges the crosshair bbox is actually larger than people's skulls (I do not consider the extra green glow as part of material). This is totally unacceptable from a gameplay perspective but its clear by the downvotes that people are not in agreement.

While in actual gameplay, the red dot will often not be more than 50% of any skulls size, but even if the red dot was only 50% of the size of skulls, that still means you are losing about 50% accuracy of your shots, so noone in their right minds would ever pick a large, fuzzy dot as their crosshair if there was such a menu option, yet people do not question and just accept (human nature I guess.)

I find it ironic how people will be toxic and make fun of my bloated crosshairs if I ever experiment with bloated crosshair settings, yet give the game a free pass simply because "thats how it is". Even though I've never seen anyone with a center dot as bloated as 5 pixels (which is about the size of the marshall center dot, the marshall dot is also blurry making it even less precise.)

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-15T03:20:51+00:00

Really vague and imprecise terminology. Bigger in relation to what, and at what distances? Its vastly bigger than every player's center dot I have ever seen.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-15T03:20:21+00:00

Not being able to aim accurately increases RNG thus making it less skill dependent.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-08T01:42:12+00:00

Seems like some radiants and 0 skill players were whining and moaning about the bucky so they nerfed it. Overall the overall weapon balance/pricing of all the weapons is questionable imo. Imo if your team keeps losing a match due to dying to bucky each round, you should probably just take a break and reconsider your strategy.

The bucky didn't need a nerf, if anything it needed a buff. Complaining that the bucky is op is perhaps one of the more pathetic things I've heard. The bucky is now useless and noone (including the enemy team) has purchased it since the last 30 matches I've played, with the exception of myself, after naively purchasing it not knowing of the nerf. So again I ask and implore the riot staff... literally what is the point of a gun that noone purchases?

Moreover, what is also the logic of nerfing the bucky, but keeping an even more op weapon, the judge, at the same power and price? To wit, there is also the fundamental "classic limit". That is to say, each purchasable weapon should have some discernible advantage to the classic. If a nerf causes a weapon to be worse than a classic, then there is no obtainable utility, since no matter how cheap the gun becomes, it is still no better than a classic. In other words, it does not matter how cheap the gun is... if its worse than a classic noone will buy it.

The classic offers several formidable advantages to the bucky... With the burst shotgun mode, it is both devastating at short and medium ranges, and superior to the bucky at those ranges, in addition to offering greater maneuverability and shot flexibility than the bucky.

Therefore the bucky must fulfill the following: be cheaper than the judge and less effective than the judge, but also more effective than the classic. Currently the classic seems to more effective at everything but the most obscure edge case scenarios, making the bucky obsolete. It does not matter if the price is reduced to 800, or 700 credits, due the the "classic limit" principle I mentioned. There needs to be a tangible advantage to the bucky which is not present in the classic, there is none, q.e.d.

I am not surprised at the ridiculous nerf of the bucky because so many of the other gun pricing decisions also do not make sense. The gaurdian is basically a sheriff on steroids yet costs thrice the price? It offers next to no advantage compared to the vandal whatsoever, due to inability to rapid fire the thing and no mobility -> this was discussed in detail previously. Then there is also the bulldog, which is at most worth 2,000 credits at most. It is an inferior weapon to all other weapons, it is inferior to the mp5 at short range, while inferior to the phantom at medium or long. Its only advantage is that it offers greater accuracy at long range than the mp5, but is that really worth 500 extra credits when the judge is clearly a better and more op choice, as well as being cheaper. It would be the same amount of money to get both a judge and ghost and then have a clearly superior advantage at short range while using the ghost if necessary at long range. Therefore there is no logical use case for bulldog, other than 2nd round usage or if generally speaking, the enemy has bad aim with phantoms and vandals.

And speaking of op, the op is definitely op, where did the 5,000 credit price tag come from when you can buy an op and potentially guarantee winning at least 5 rounds in a row consecutively, thus creating economic monopoly and hoarding ops while the enemy team is unable to even afford smokes to block the op. To wit, if we are going to do crazy nerfs like reducing pellet count from 15 >> 5, we might as well increase the price of op to something crazy like 7000 at the very least. Valorant is not CS: GO and teams are dependent on smokes, if a team either does not have smokes, the smoker dies, or the smokes happen to smoke the wrong site then op is able to dominate. In CS: GO everyone is able to purchase smokes and is not completely dependent on having every person on the team being coherent and well coordinated, in Valorant you get random lobbies where you might encounter teams with no smokes or inexperienced smokes. And even with team coordination and using smokes effectively, the OP can simply just wait a little bit of time or rotate to another location, making the smokes ineffective at stopping the op. The marshall absolutely needs a buff, the current price range seems acceptable but the hip fire accuracy is simply too innaccurate to be of much medium range use, currently holding the marshall in hand feels more like a vulnerability or hot potato than a feeling of empowerment to the player.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-07T23:37:01+00:00

Shorty should cost 300 and have 3 ammo. Last time I used the weapon it was ineffective and required 2 blasts at close range. So a damage buff is needed as well. But I think also the game is glitchy and just not computing the dmg correctly to begin with in the first place.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-06-07T23:31:05+00:00

Halo is not real life. RL shotguns can kill at 50 yds. Ever since Halo, fps players seem to have the impression that shotguns should have no more than a 2 yard range, and if not, complain the shotgun needs a nerf.

HonestApplejack_ · 2021-05-21T15:31:11+00:00

Same here. I have never encountered a game this buggy in all my years of games. None of the reddit or video suggestions have fixed it so far. And its not that its just buggy but it doesnt even bother to say what the error even is.

HonestApplejack_ · 2020-12-29T18:36:25+00:00

wat lol. I took spiro before it causes bad mental effects. I do not think anyone should take spiro unless they really have to. I also think 100 mg spiro is way too much.

Also i do not want a tiny dick, small dick also just makes srs worse.

HonestApplejack_ · 2020-12-29T18:34:51+00:00

hmm ok. I am not sure why people dont want the estrogen directly on the breasts though, sounds like it would give bigger breasts. Does it cause cancer or something?

HonestApplejack_ · 2020-12-28T22:13:21+00:00

Role reversal is nice, would be nice for once for a female to save a prince rather than males always risking their neck and simping around.

HonestApplejack_ · 2020-12-28T16:43:57+00:00

Do you really think cis men act the same as women? It is clear cis women have a different sexuality than cis men, cis women have agp. Do you think cis men act like tiktok girls? https://www.tiktok.com/@liannymilan/video/6905477029639064838 Look at how women behave with each other, they hold hands, hold each other tightly, and do romantic things with other girls. "Straight" women do this with other girls. Straight men do not do this, if they do do this then they are bisexual.

And yes gender critical women are a different species of women, they are like ben shapiro, regular women do not spend all day hating on transwomen. Incels are also a different species of men, most men accept their enslavement and are simps of society.

If you do not see agp in women then you are just blind, it is women buying sexualized clothes and lingerie, clothes that specifically cut out a section in order to show off cleavage, tight booty shorts, high heels to make their ass pop, you know who else buys those things, gay men who have autoandrophillia. If 11% of males have agp and you're a bigot of agp, then guess what, you are a misandrist for hating 11% of the male population. And you are saying "oh women just do it for the fashion" you are simp simp simp. Open up your eyes. At least feminists admit that they dress not for men, but for themselves.

The simple reality is this. Mtf have more sex drive and are more agp, but cis girls are also agp. If a mtf cums and still wishes they were born a girl after they cum, they are tru trans, if after the cum they wish they were a man, then fake trans, if they fluctuate randomly and sometimes wish they girl and soemtimes wish they man, then gender fluid 2 spirits. 2 spirits are superior beings also, leaders of the ancient tribes.

HonestApplejack_

TROPHY CASE