Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - bazzajunior

Pages: [1] 2
Ah ha! After a number of attempts, I had one final look on Unity Answers to see if someone had presented the same query as me and actually found one -

I like the idea of using the button on the front of my game for a reminder on how to play, but as the targeted player is generally under 8, it’s probably easier for them to see a quick “this is how you play it” and then leave them to it.

Now I just need to figure out for the code translates from C# to PlayMaker  ;)

Thanks for confirming that playerprefs is the way forward. My game is (currently) simple enough that one quick tutorial with how to move and how to fire the toy tank's cannon should be sufficient. I may seek to expand the game to include further levels so another set of tutorials may be required  :)

Good afternoon all,

I have a game on the Google Play Store which has been somewhat successful but appreciate that its lacking an in-game tutorial to show how the vehicle movement works. It’s a very simple touch and drag to move setup (vehicle follows the players finger) but I’m aware that some players simply tap the screen expecting the vehicle to move or try and swipe it (the game is aimed to younger players).

If I’m looking at implementing a one-time video tutorial, or something similar, what’s the best option to look at with regards to the player seeing the tutorial once, but never again once they’re happy how to play?

Should I be looking at using playerprefs or is there a better route to take for this?

Doing a Google search is fruitless as all attempts to search up in-game tutorials or first run instructions for Unity just ends up with me getting tips on how to create my ‘first unity game’  >:(

Any advice would be very much appreciated.


PlayMaker Help / Help with virtual joystick
« on: June 06, 2019, 04:28:51 PM »
I'm using the Playmaker Virtual Joystick (working surprisingly well for something that was designed for Unity 5) for controlling a top-down pseudo 2D game involving a vehicle but can't get my head around how to get the X and Y axis to convert to a 360 rotation.

At present I have the game setup so that when the player clicks or holds down the joystick, motorTorque is applied to the all of the wheels and the vehicle moves forwards. My aim is that when the joystick is moved around its circumference, the vehicle will rotate to a similar direction. I just can't get my head around the necessary float/multiply/rotate or any other maths necessary to (e.g. to convert 0 to 1 and -0 to -1 into something useful like 0-360 degrees).

I have a similar setup for an touch and drag input on another game (i.e. forward torque applied and the tank rotates to look at the players finger) and would love to get a similar setup working here.

If anyone knows of a way to do this or can direct me to any tutorials would be highly appreciated.

Thanks in advance

After receiving a warning about having to update my app from 32 to 64 bit for inclusion on the Google Play Console, I took the necessary actions in Unity's Player Settings (IL2CPP and ARM64) and exported the app out using Gradle (I have to remove certain permissions from the Android Manifest that can't be done any other way) and built a new Android App Bundle (aab) in Android Studio.

The aab uploaded fine into a new Beta release and passed all the necessary checks on the Google Play Console, but upon starting up the game on my Pixel 2, the game's touch movement system doesn't work.

The movement system, which consists of a detect touch (TouchEvent) to start the wheel motor torque of a tank and then track the user's finger on the screen to rotate to its location, hasn't been altered in any way and worked fine following an APK update last week.

Now, the game tracks the user's finger and rotates the tank but the motor torque doesn't appear to be doing anything.

I'm baffled by this as nothing's changed but the aab is obviously messing with something that an apk didn't have an issue with.

Has anyone else noticed any odd changes since the roll out of the aab option?

PlayMaker Announcements / Re: Playmaker Game Jam
« on: February 10, 2018, 04:56:34 AM »

 yes, I think the best option would be that every one who wants to sponsor this game jam comes forward, and the winners will end up with a bunch of games and assets, this would be a very participative way to grant participants and winners with a feeling of community.

what do you think? If that's an idea that you like, we could have a google sheet or some kind of online document where we list all the prizes, all the categories and rules?



Just say the word and I'll email across a redeemable code and a logo, should you need one.

Here's my game on the Play Store -

It's not on the App Store at the moment as I'm PC-based and that $99 yearly subscription fee is a bit too much for my wallet at the moment.

My app is a kids game, but even if it's given as a prize for proof of what can be done using PlayMaker, it's all good. My game is 100% FSM-based as I'm a graphic designer by trade, so PlayMaker was my way of finally building something without spending a year or two having to learn code.

PlayMaker Announcements / Re: Playmaker Game Jam
« on: February 09, 2018, 05:32:32 AM »
Would it be cheeky to ask Unity if they'd be able to offer some support/advertising/prizes too? They have published videos from their official YouTube account with PlayMaker tutorials so would be in their interest to raise awareness of the event ;)

PlayMaker Announcements / Re: Playmaker Game Jam
« on: February 09, 2018, 04:36:25 AM »
As a small prize to the winner, would it be worth asking developers to see if they'd be happy to offer a free copy of their PlayMaker-based published games? I'd be happy to provide a redeemable Google Play Store code for mine. Just an idea :)

User Showcase / Re: Crashy Bash Boom (Android)
« on: December 08, 2017, 01:08:09 PM »
Thanks for the nice reply and the advice to create a video. Oddly enough, I was thinking about that this afternoon. Time to boot up Adobe Premiere  :)

User Showcase / Crashy Bash Boom (Android)
« on: December 08, 2017, 09:28:24 AM »
Hi All,

I've just released my first Android game onto the Google Play Store:

The game is designed for small kids (aged 3-9) and is based around the premise of a small toy tank which can be easily driven around a playroom environment, complete with other interactive toys and games.

As a father of two pre-teen kids who get engrossed in their games and find it hard to put down their tablets/3DSs, I took this onboard and wanted to design a quick 'pick up and play' game that they could happily play for 5-10 minutes but then could put it down without too much fuss.

It's taken around two years to develop, going through various design iterations, and the usual trials and tribulations of having to learn everything, aside from 3D modelling, from scratch. I studied a BA in Computer Animation at university around 13 years ago and after many years as a Graphic Designer, I thought I'd use my spare time to build a game - actually using my degree.

The game is up on sale for GBP 0.79p, but if anyone wants to try the game out, I can provide a promo code to those who are curious (and want to spread the word ;D )



Just an update for those who may find themselves in a similar predicament to mine - using a translated rigidbody rather than one moved by force. I found that by keeping the move towards advanced running with a 0 finish distance and a fixed update, by setting the project time (fixed timestep) to 0.005, this allows Unity to keep a better track of the colliders and remove some of the dodgy collisions.

In my particular instance, my game object is no longer slipping through a mesh where a 90 degree angle is in place or where two meshes (both static) may have resulted in a pass-through.

It's not true movement by the use of physics but it does work :)

I've had a look at the NavMeshAgent but sadly it's not quite as competent as the MoveTowardsAdvanced setup I currently have. I've tried looking at pathfinding to see if I was missing out on anything but I think it's more complicated than I can get my head round at this time.

MoveTowardsAdvanced is pretty good when it comes to ramps, collisions with rigidbodies and bumping into obstacles with a physic material applied - it's just that it has a habit of slipping through the mesh where 90 degree corners meet or any box colliders which aren't on a level plane. It's also great for tracking a constant touch/click and drag on the screen when used with a 0 finish distance.


I've been applying static markers for lighting purposes so no changes there.

I'll give this a try and post back the results later on.

Thanks for that advice. Your video is really useful :D

My game does involve a lot of collisions with the 'tank' bumping into static colliders and crashing through building blocks, dominoes, toys, etc (one of the reasons why I'm looking for better collisions) and moving over a platform - would a navmesh allow for this?

I will have a look at that later today though and see if it'll integrate with what I have (which fingers crossed it could).

Hi All,

Hoping someone can help to shed some light on an issue I've been having for a while now.

I'm currently creating a 3D game for mobile with a 'vehicle' moving across a plane.

I've been using a movement system based upon a 'click/touch screen to set a target position' using Move Towards Advanced to move my gameobject and whilst it does work, it's never been 100% successful with regards to collisions. I've made sure that the finish distance is 0 and it runs on a fixed update.

I guess what I'm looking to see is if there is a way of doing this using a force-based rigidbody movement rather than a translate position. I have tried Add Force with an impulse set to the Z axis (self) but the results are always a bit odd - especially the way it can sometimes head off into space.

I did try and think of a way to run a "here's the position, now move here" but as a non-programmer, I can't get my head round it and sure I must be missing something obvious.

If someone can give a few pointers, I'd be incredibly grateful.

Pages: [1] 2