New AS2 Tutorial

I understand that AS2 is outdated but that’s currently the actionscript I know. Now what should my tutorial include? I already have:

1. Custom Cursor
2. Mute Button

What else should I include in this AS2 tutorial.

HAS to be easy learning stuff.

My honest opinion is nothing o-o.

Originally posted by ABipolarCactus:

What else should I include in this AS2 tutorial.

A safeword, because the only purpose of an As2 tutorial is punishment.

Maybe something like “actionscript 3”

I need myself to learn AS3 at the moment. I just can’t seem to grasp the concept of it. I was thinking about switching to Flash Develop but then again that wouldn’t help me either since I don’t like coding.

Originally posted by ABipolarCactus:

since I don’t like coding.

Originally posted by ABipolarCactus:

my tutorial

Wat.

Originally posted by Draco18s:

Originally posted by ABipolarCactus:

since I don’t like coding.

Originally posted by ABipolarCactus:

my tutorial

Wat.

I don’t like coding, that’s why I’m not good at making games. Mute buttons and custom cursors are simple codes.

And that’s why you’re not qualified to be making tutorials.

Originally posted by ABipolarCactus:

I need myself to learn AS3 at the moment. I just can’t seem to grasp the concept of it. I was thinking about switching to Flash Develop but then again that wouldn’t help me either since I don’t like coding.

The overall concept is actually just like AS2. You have objects. They interact with other objects. You put movieclips/bitmaps/etc inside other movieclips, arrange them to taste, etc. Instead of the horrific this.createEmptyMovieClip("PointlessNameHere", this.getNextHighestDepth()), you can do this.addChild(new MovieClip()); It’s stricter in terms of what you can get away with, but that’s a GOOD thing.

Basically As3 is less code?

Originally posted by Aesica:

Originally posted by ABipolarCactus:

I need myself to learn AS3 at the moment. I just can’t seem to grasp the concept of it. I was thinking about switching to Flash Develop but then again that wouldn’t help me either since I don’t like coding.

The overall concept is actually just like AS2. You have objects. They interact with other objects. You put movieclips/bitmaps/etc inside other movieclips, arrange them to taste, etc. Instead of the horrific this.createEmptyMovieClip("PointlessNameHere", this.getNextHighestDepth()), you can do this.addChild(new MovieClip()); It’s stricter in terms of what you can get away with, but that’s a GOOD thing.

If you are going to make a tutorial then it has to be on a game(platfomer/avoider) not just random codes that we wouldn’t know how to implement into our game.

Originally posted by oatlol:

Basically As3 is less code?

Not necessarily. It’s more in some places, less in others, but overall it leads to better code.

Why do you want to make a tutorial in the first place? Tutorials are usually written by people with years of experience. It’s not just about pasting in some code into a fancy box for the newbie programmer to copy.

Originally posted by Drakim:

Why do you want to make a tutorial in the first place? Tutorials are usually written by people with years of experience. It’s not just about pasting in some code into a fancy box for the newbie programmer to copy.

That’s how it should be. The problem is that many tutorials are made by people who don’t have a clue about what they’re doing; then others follow those tutorials and learn nothing but the bad practices of the one who wrote it.

I think it’s some sort of ego thing, just trying to get things up on your account for a D and to look knowledgeable.

Ignore the negative responses and make your tutorial. However snobby people get about it, there are still tons of AS2 users, and the ones likely to be looking for tutorials aren’t the pro coders, they’re the people who can’t do the things your tutorial covers.

Try to include explanations of what the codes you’re using do, and how they work, rather than just supplying them as copy and paste material, though. A good tutorial teaches people why the script works rather than just giving it out for free.

Tutorials written by people who think they know it all lead to horrendous material like this, a 5,000 word essay on how to define a variable.

Isn’t that a contradiction, saybox, when you demand explanations, but doom those who give them?

Saybox… just because you are better at AS2 than you are at AS3 doesn’t mean that everyone better than you at what we do are snobby. That “essay” you linked is for people who actually like programming, not for people who just to just scratch the surface and pretend they are programmers.

You’re snobby if you’re dismissing someone else’s efforts just because they’re below what you could do.

If you need 5,000 words to teach someone how to define a variable, you’re either writing for the sake of your own ego (“Look, newbie, see how indepth my knowledge is!”), or you’re an awful writer.

Originally posted by NineFiveThree:

Isn’t that a contradiction, saybox, when you demand explanations, but doom those who give them?

I’m sure you can see there’s room for a midpoint between no explanation at all, and one which covers 10 sides of A4.

I don’t care either way, but they’re not dismissing him because he’s below them. Actually they’re not dismissing him at all. They’re advising a self-admitted non-coder not to write coding tutorials. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Originally posted by BigJM:

I don’t care either way, but they’re not dismissing him because he’s below them. Actually they’re not dismissing him at all. They’re advising a self-admitted non-coder not to write coding tutorials. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

He might not be a strong coder (right now) but that’s no reason to tell him not to even try. A little support and encouragement would go a lot further than telling him not to even bother. This applies to most of the replies to new members on this board, actually.

Don’t you think someone should be strong in a subject before they start teaching other people?

I don’t think they need to know anything more than what they’re actually teaching. and if it turns out he doesn’t understand the codes after all, no harm done, perhaps he’ll learn something new along the way too. there’s no reason not to try.

So you disagree with what senekis said earlier? Honestly I think you both have a valid point.

Originally posted by saybox:

I’m sure you can see there’s room for a midpoint between no explanation at all, and one which covers 10 sides of A4.

I do. I guess everybody’s midpoint lies somewhere else.

This link is covering more than just the variable definition.
I’d say the content is more important than the page count.

I would agree with Senekis if we were talking about a particle generation system or something high level and processor intensive. For a beginner tutorial, sometimes it’s best to have beginners teaching beginners – they tend to write about what people at their level want to know.

To a beginner, most of the 5k words in the tutorial I linked are completely irrelevant. The content is worthless if the people who need it can’t actually find it, and let’s be clear on this point, someone wanting to know about naming conventions, execution speed, or efficiency isn’t a beginner. All a beginner wants to know is what they can use variables for, and how to use them. Coding standards, efficiency, speed tests – those are for intermediate or above.