45 replies to this topic

[Trainman 2000]

thanks! that was very informative!

[Loserface300]

Sorry for bring this old topic up, But Does it really w

And can someone give me a copy of the trainer?


the link on page one is broken.

Edited by rokenbok, 21 March 2008 - 01:22 AM.

[Sambo]

Does WHAT work? Several things were discussed.

[Loserface300]

The tranier on the firtst page that stupid posted

[Sambo]

As the thread stated - not very well. The link to the trainer is not functioning either.

The bottom line is that you can manipulate small / large object references in the "?" tab, but the limits per object category still apply. You can have only so many in the game, and more than a certain amout or volume of objects in your objdat folder will generate errors.

[Loserface300]

well, does anyone still have the trainer

[Nighthawkbalt]

Hey All,
Just A Silly Thing , Why Wouldn't It be Easier Just To Make Another OBJectData Folder And Put It In The Game Right Under ObjectData Folder, It Seems To Work For me ,Once I Put it in Resarted My Comp. Then Opened RCT 2 Then Closed It Out And Reopened it Again And It Reckongnized The File As Being Part Of Thegame HHHHHMMMMMMM !!!!!! IDEA !!!! Before You Attempt COPY ( BackUp) Your Game First To be On The Safe Side. I Guesse I Got Lucky On Doing This,, This way Here I Have Access To All Of My Objects Without Overlapping, If you Trust What i Say Try It I Mean No Harm To Your Game., I wouldn't say it if it wasn't going to work for most of you,, YES It May Not Work For Others , Depending on Your Vers. OF RCT2 ( USA VERS. Works Well ) All Others ??????? You have To Deciede On if You Want To Try It ., Have Fun And Keep It Interesting ..,,

[Sambo]

I Have Access To All Of My Objects Without Overlapping

I don't know what this means. Please explain.

[DesertFox]

Is it just me, or have other people noticed that many numbers associated with computers and code are multiples of "8"?
Anyway. Thanks for the heads-up about the object limits!

[Wolfman]

Is it just me, or have other people noticed that many numbers associated with computers and code are multiples of "8"?
Anyway. Thanks for the heads-up about the object limits!

I'll assume that you're talking about wall heights.
Simply because this would be easier to explain using walls an an example.

You mentioned multiples of 8...

8 = 1/4 Wall
16=1/2 Wall
24=3/4 Wall
32=Full Wall

Since there ARE objects that are taller, I'm sure that there are other heights beyond these. But since these are the most common, let's use these as an example. (But keeping in mind, this is NOT the limit of the predetermined heights.)

It's more or less where the point is, where a stacking level is created. At 8, 16, 24, 32 etc. pixels. Stacking doesn't just "happen". These are predetermined levels. Depending on the designated height of the wall.

Anything wall design that is shorter than the defined heights of 8, 16, 24, will end up having a gap or a line between the objects when stacked. These heights are pre determined, something like blocks. So when different wall styles are used, everything will actually line up and fit together when different wall styles are used together.

If people just made their custom walls and objects at whatever pixel height they somehow managed to determine as "standard", then all custom scenery & objects would be mismatched, and look like a crooked house, with no standard.

In the real world... It's more or less along the same lines that full plywood sheets are 4 x 8 feet, 2 x 4's are a standardized "finished" dimension. Why outlet boxes are a specific size & shape. Having a "standard" established makes things much easier, than if companies that make materials made their own standard. It would be a much bigger mess and more work than construction actually is these days. This is why sometimes when construction materials are brought together from different countries, (unless these items are custom made to predetermined specifications,) that the standards of each country are significantly different, and probably cause more problems than expected.