1) At some point in the past was decided that players should preferably have one Clonk in their player file, a character that they identify with, and the player file should not be cluttered with lots of different Clonks, or with different crew types (e.g. SpaceClonk, or Knight, etc.). This is cool for expansions, however this would be nice as part of a documentation somewhere? What about games that actually add new Clonk/character types, should you simply make a new player file to play with these?
2) Now to the actual proposal: We already can append animations from one skeleton file to another, and we can inherit ActMap properties, and so forth. My idea was that each animation could have its own definition, therefore its own script, actmap, skeleton file, so if you make a new character type you can just include whatever you need from the basic objects. Would that make sense from a development perspective?
2) Now to the actual proposal: We already can append animations from one skeleton file to another, and we can inherit ActMap properties, and so forth. My idea was that each animation could have its own definition, therefore its own script, actmap, skeleton file, so if you make a new character type you can just include whatever you need from the basic objects. Would that make sense from a development perspective?

I agree that you would add a list of includes, which can be collected in the current animations definition as a single include then, basically what we have now. The difference is, that you could place e.g. the swim animations, actmap and all of the script effects that are related to them into a single definition, so if you want to create a clonk-like character without the ability to swim, then you would simply not include this.
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill