Collision question

[THE WORLD]

Is it okay to not put a blue collision on a weapon? Because it looks odd if a person punches his opponent's sword and hits the opponent.

[Luis Alejandro]

Its a topic of debate, it depends on whether or not you want to.

[Cobra Caddie]

It's up to you. I don't even put blue clsn over the attacks boxes of most of the moves of the characters I convert, because that's actually how it is in the source games.

Just ignore people who scream "infinite priority!" because they're usually clueless about how ACTUAL fighting games play as opposed to converting to some kind of imaginary Mugen standard.

You can read more about it here:

http://randomselect.piiym.net/forum/index.php?topic=4646.msg34142#msg34142

[Cyanide]

Ah but most games don't do it that way, only some, and using the most common standard makes for better global compatibility. The correct way to go is to zone it a bit. Like, not 2 boxes that are exact replicas but a clsn2 that partly sticks out of the clsn1 and a clsn1 that sticks out of the clsn2 so both are visible seperately.

When it comes to swords though i recommend going up to a quarter of the swords length past the hilt.

As i've said before, the clsn's aren't only there to provide hittable areas, they are also to display motion and a certain amount of realism, you don't do the same thing EVERY time so it makes sense that you adjust your body providing vulnerable area's or adjust the move to actually make contact. That's why clsn's shouldn't be an accurate representation of the sprite but a guide of where it is.

[Cobra Caddie]

I just meant in this specific example to ignore people who say that, and that I do that for all the moves because the characters I convert are like that in their source games.

Most games do have a "box hitting box vs invincibilty" collision system as opposed to Mugen's number system, which is what the "Infinite priority!" screamers complain about.