text:
Trigger an event only if two colliders fully cover each other
Let's say I have two different objects that can go through each other. Both have a circle collider (2d) that has the exact same size and there is a good chance that the two colliders will completely overlap each other. How can I trigger an event when that happens?

In that case you might just want to compare their positions:
if (transform.position == other.transform.position) {

Keep in mind that this checks for exact equality. Positions are floating point values and many games leave them to the physics engine, so they might differ by a miniscule amount which is invisible to the player but visible to the scripting engine. Actually, Vector3 overloads the == operator to return true when the distance between the vectors is smaller than 0.00001f, but even that might be too pedantic in some cases.
A better check might be to calculate the distance and trigger the condition when it is "close enough", in this example 1/100th of a unit:
if (Vector3.Distance(transform.position, other.transform.position) < 0.01f ) {

I'm not sure if there is a way to do that which covers all types of colliders, but for circle colliders you can do this:
For each circle collider, you have the object's position, then you can add the circle collider's offset to get he centre of the resulting circle collider. You can also get the circle collider's radius to compare how they overlap.
Let A be the position of the first circle collider (gameObject.position +circleCollider.offset) and B the same but for the second circle collider. Let Ar be the radius (circleCollider.radius) of the first circle collider and Br the radius of the second. Then:
// will be true if B is inside A's radius
bool aCollision = distance(A,B) <= Ar;

// will be true if A is inside B's radius
bool bCollision = distance(A,B) <= Br;

// this will be true if either A is inside B's radius, or B is inside A's radius
bool eitherCollision = aCollision || bCollision;

// this will be true if both A is inside B's radius, and B is inside A's
bool bothCollision = aCollision && bCollision;

This is a way to manually handle collision, so that you get the desired effect. Keep in mind though that the last line will only be true if A and B have the same radius, and the distance of each other is exactly that radius. Otherwise they can't both "include" each other at the same time.
Keep in mind this is pseudocode/C#. You would most likely need to replace distance with Vector2.Distance, or an equivalent in any other language.
I'm not sure what is the desired effect that you want, if you just want to make sure that both colliders simply overlap, without checking their radius or anything else, then @Phillipp's answer is way simpler.


text:
How do I get the number of Steam friends online programmatically?
How can I get the current number of Steam friends online in order to insert it into a script or program? I'm looking to use this value to do something like changing an LED colour or for providing data for a desktop widget etc.
Is this possible? How do I get access to that number?
P.S. I got my idea from here: Xbox Live Traffic Light Notifies You When Friends are Gaming

Steam does not support it, but there is a workaround to get it done programmatically. However, private profiles will not work, so you will not be able to see a friend's status, even if they allowed you to see it. The API is public and it will only be able to see  and parse public profiles.
In short you need to query Steam's web API in a loop:

GetFriendList - get all friends of that account
For each friend use GetPlayerSummaries and the personastate in the returned result will include their online status.
Save results, repeat, compare.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
Prevent Unity from crashing your computer?
Recently, I made a very dumb mistake that caused Unity to crash my computer. I could move the mouse sometimes, but everything else became completely unresponsive, leading to me having to shut off my PC.
What happened: I had an object, let's say an arrow, that could collide with another object, let's call it spawner. When the arrow collides with the spawner, it's supposed to destroy the arrow that activated the spawner. The spawner would then, as the name might imply, spawn more arrows. The problem was that I forgot to temporarily disable to collision on the newly spawned arrows, meaning that as soon as they would spawn inside the spawner's collision box, they'd spawn more arrows, and those arrows would spawn more arrows, and those arrows would... you get the idea. It was a very stupid mistake I realized the moment I hit play, but it was too late.
Now, I know that was entirely my fault, but I was wondering if you could prevent Unity from sending your PC into a coma like that? (Besides not making a dumb mistake like that, of course...) I'll be honest, I kind of expected Unity would have some sort of fail safe for this kind of error. Is there a way to limit the object count for example?

I’m not sure how it works but there is a “Panic Button” in the asset store which apparently breaks out of infinite loops: https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/tools/utilities/panic-button-40167 but unfortunately: it is not free, and apparently doesn’t work in Unity 2018

There is far more than one way to put Unity into an infinite loop which freezes both the game and the editor. So limiting the maximum number of objects (if that's actually possible, I don't think it is) would only protect you from a very small subset of possible mistakes.
But you can use a trick built into Windows to prevent Unity from using all of your CPU cores. The other cores are then still able to serve any other tasks, like handling the Windows UI system.
While Unity is running:

Open the Windows task manager with Ctrl+Shift+Esc
Go to the "Details" tab
Right-click on the Unity process
Select "Set Affinity..."
Uncheck one of your CPU cores

"limiting the maximum number of objects (if that's actually possible, I don't think it is)" it's not unfortunately. You can always to that from your script though.

@GabrieleVierti I think that's easier said than done. Counting the object you already have in your scene is expensive, and simply keeping count of instantiated objects doesn't account for objects getting destroyed. It would be easy to do if you use object pools, but those are not a good solution for every possible situation. But if you have a good idea how this could be done with minimum work and side effects, you could post an answer with some example code.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
How to make a 'One Hit and Dead' platformer feel fair
I am currently making a run 'n gun platformer, in which the player dies instantly when they get hit. I'm curious how to make this feel fair. I'm aware of putting checkpoints frequently enough, allowing the player to retry almost instantly, and merciful hitboxes. But I'm curious to know how I should go about level design? Run 'n guns are much different from sanic-speed wall jump platformers like meat boy.
You see, games like Hollow Knight let you learn how to avoid taking hits early in the game by giving easy challenges. If you get hit by something unexpected in Hollow Knight, you can always focus and gain some health, and it wouldn't feel unfair. If that happened in my game, that would feel unfair.
Since I'm designing a Megaman-X like game with a boss at the end of each stage, how am I supposed to go about teaching the player how to dodge fast moving projectiles that you would only know how to dodge after seeing how they act?
And yes, there is going to be a first level before you can go play the other ones in whatever order you like.

You may find it useful to look into antepieces, where an obstacle or enemy is introduced in a safe environment to give players a chance to practice with them, before being used in a manner where failure means damage or death.  Even if all damage is death, using them remains a viable way to give a player a preview so they know what to expect before forcing them to do or die.  Alternatively, invincibility powerups might be used to let the player preview something before having to do it for real.

I'm aware of the safe environment thing, but the invincibility power-up is a really good idea. Thank you.

Coming in from a different genre, Geometry Dash may also be an inspiration for how to do "one-hit-and-you're-dead" thing well without frequent checkpoints.

Geometry feels more like pure memorization as opposed to some puzzle-solving like meat boy, but I'll keep it in mind.

Have you played the game "I wanna be the Boshy"? It's a silly, meme-filled, fan-made game, but it has gotten a certain cult status. It's a one-hit-and-you-are-dead kind of game, but it is made to be deliberately annoying and ruthless. Play this game, and learn what is done to make it seem "unfair", and you can do the opposite.

Its a 2d platformer shooter so i think your enemies shoot too? In that case build 'natural' defenses for short time hiding to make the player rest and plan the next steps, as well as calming down after a rush

I'll take a look at it. Does it SEEM unfair or is it actually.

2.Thanks Jannis!

@Vakore "I wanna be the Boshy" is deliberately very unfair. It has enemies and traps that insta-kills you which are unpredictable and difficult to avoid. It requires very precise platforming, and it is generally just very unforgiving.

That's the trade-off to this kind of game play design, the player is expected to die many times to learn mechanics and Boss abilities.  To make those deaths palatable to the player I have a few ideas:
1) nothing can be random, everything must have a pattern that can be learned.  There is nothing more unfair than dying to an attack you've never seen before and will probably never see again.
2) hit boxes should be precise and dependable, don't make them "merciful" because then the player will feel out of control, and the player should always feel in control.
3) reaching a checkpoint should be a Big Deal, make reaching checkpoints exciting and use them to pace the game so the player won't get fatigued playing nonstop.  Think of Checkpoints as a pacing mechanic, not a fairness mechanic; the fairness comes from game play and not the rest stops in-between all that playing.
4) alternate easy progress toward a checkpoint with skill+learning challenges to reach the next, let the player feel good about playing better.  If the player has immediate feedback like that then new challenges feel fair because they know that it can be learned, just like they did before!
5) bosses should be a Huge Payoff, and you might consider adding a scoring system to encourage players to go back multiple times to achieve special conditions and raise their performance scores.  While the player may die a lot it feels fair if they are working towards an extraordinary goal.

I understand that. Random isn't something that can be thrown around wille-nille. However, if the player can react to it with a cue, such as breathing in before spitting acid or making a motion before charging.

By Merciful I mean in the player's favor. For instance, the hitbox of a projectile will be slightly smaller than what it looks like, but not too much.

Ok.

Ok.

Ok for the payoff, but I don't want some sort of scoring system as that would ruin the point of the game I'm making. Perhaps achievements for the game in all instead of single levels, like beating it < 1H

One possibility is to add a recovery mechanic where one hit doesn't kill but severely weakens you and the second hit will kill you for sure.  The early Super Mario games did this, where the mushroom in addition to making you larger, gave you the ability to take the first hit without dying.  Sonic did something similar with the rings - get hit once and your rings go flying, but if you can recapture some of them before a second hit, you don't die.  In either case, the first hit is a significant penalty without being an instant death.

I'm not convinced about the recovery mechanic in that role, but it might be an advanced-levels puzzle to solve (i.e. Pick Up Powerup + Run Through Deadly Trap + Recover On Other Side).  Or the recovery mechanic could be part of a Difficulty setting and turned off for Hard modes and above.  Good potential tool to use to build out the game!

I'm not interested in recovery that much as that would be more frustrating in the levels where there is a lot going on. Good idea though.

Nothing random vs. random with cue significantly changes the feel of the game.  Imagine someone trying to speedrun the game.  If there is nothing random, they can memorize the patterns and it's purely a test of memory and reflexes.  If there are random attacks with cues, then sometimes they will get the "bad" result and have to restart the level through no fault of their own.  Both decisions can lead to good games, but the decision should be taken very carefully.

"merciful" != "random", see e.g. touhou

Even Super Mario Bros. has forgiving hitboxes. And I'd say it did pretty well. Don't overdo it (unless you're going for a bullet hell situation) but a little give is okay. Just make sure it's always predictable.

In addition to Patrick's answer:

Time it takes to retry needs to be short, borderline instantaneous. Take Super Meat Boy as an example. Compare with Teslagrad's 4 second death animation.
Time it takes to regain your progress should also be relatively quick. This goes along with Patrick's comments regarding checkpoints. Taslagrad is pretty good here, as you respawn at the entrance to the room you just entered and most rooms can take only seconds to completely transverse, no more than a minute at the high end.
No long term consequences beyond time lost. Don't penalize the player's exp or in-game currency. Such penalties lead to the player complaining about cheap deaths. For instance, in Teslagrad I found a particularly hard puzzle that kept repaving me facing towards the door I entered, and if I tried to start the puzzle without first turning around, I'd kill myself by miss-timing a jump+ability usage. Which cost me am additional 5 seconds as. I waited for the death animation to finish.
Put limits on the frequency, accuracy, and coordination skills required when building your puzzles or other challenges. The tighter the accuracy or timing the worse off your game will be, as those players that have issues  (be they handicapped or just less skilled) will grow frustrated and rage-quit. This is particularly important when it comes to boss fights. "Do the thing 3 times, 3 times" is the biggest complaint I've seen about Teslagrad. Everyone rapidly figures out what they need to do, but actually doing it often requires incredibly precise timing or movement. The act isn't even that hard, its pulling it off 9 times in a row without getting hit that's the problem.

This is also why I hate Super Meat Boy myself. The slippy controls combined with the pixel-perfect jumping, frame-perfect timing is something I just can't do.

Great additions, I agree with all of them.

Just got on this site after playing super meat boy, and I did mention that.

Okey dokey. New Game+ is something I will do to be punishing instead >:)

Ok. I don't have any lives/currency. Its just do level, beat it, play another, and dialogue after you beat bosses.

Once you reach a boss and die on it, screen quickly fades black and then back to fighting again. Also, I'm not sure how to compensate for handicapped due to the fact that my game is based around challenge(like meat boy)

I enjoy meat boy, but hey, can't please everyone.

Thanks for the additions!

Not all of the points apply to all games. Sonic is probably the closest example I can think of for a game where you lose "currency" when you get hit, but that's instead of having to restart the level. And even just a simple "skip this level" option can be enough: puzzle-platforms are best when the player can decide "you know what, this level's too much" and can try another one.

I think he meant lose currency when you die. For instance, if you fail to reclaim your loot before dying a second time, that loot is gone. Like Shovel Knight, Dark Souls, or Hollow Knight. I don't have any currency in my game either.

'Skip this level thing' works in many cases, like meat boy. However, since I want challenge and this game is much similar to megaman X but you die in one hit, I don't think I'll be adding that in.

Thanks for the advice though!

Shovel Knight, Dark Souls, and Hollow Knight are good examples, I just haven't played any of them, so they weren't games I could immediately point to. Anyway, at least I gave you some things to think about!

Another option to keep your players motivated: Give some cumulative score for each try. If the player gains something permanent for e.g. every enemy killed, even botched attempts will not feel like wasted time. An example could be some global score to achieve new skins/weapons, which will increase for each enemy killed, regardless how often you die.

The best thing you can do when dealing with situations like these is to study other games that share mechanics and systems with what you intend.  Given your description, the two off the top of my head that I think you should most look at are Metal Slug and Contra.  Both involve gun usage as their primary mechanic in a sidescrolling platformer environment, and both involve one hit and dead mechanics like you describe.
Some things that you will notice in games like these is that because getting hit is so costly, there are almost no "surprise" attacks.  Nothing moves fast unless there is a huge telegraph to go with it that clearly shows that you should move/jump/whatever so you don't die.  You need to give people opportunities to see how things might kill them via a combination of telegraphing and make sure that the oncoming death is slow enough that they have a fair amount of time to react before it actually hits them.
Another thing games like this share is a lives system as opposed to a checkpoint one.  Where death respawns you right where you died a moment or two later, usually with a little mercy invincibility to help you get through whatever just killed you.  This allows you to use your number of lives as a kind of limited pool of mistakes available to you without breaking flow entirely.  While this might not be strictly necessary, the ubiquity of it is something I would analyze for game feel, especially comparing with other popular "one hit death" games like bullet hells.
Finally, a critical piece is that how the game responds must be predictable! Successful play and flow in games like these requires understanding and abusing the mechanics of the game to enable deathless play.  Randomness is not entirely out of the question, but things like enemy spawns, enemy AI, and bullet patterns should be very understandable and predictable so that skilled players can use that information to their advantage.  Getting through a section because it was easier than usual or getting stymied because RNG hates you both feel bad when the mechanics imply it should be down to your skill.

I'll be sure to look at those games when I can. Unfortunately neither are in the 3DS eShop virtual console.

I'll be sure to keep this in mind.

Eh... that WORKS but that feels more like health and perma-death.

Okey dokey.

Thanks for taking the time to answer this!

As an exercise, try watching this level of Metal Slug 2 and see if you can identify where it's teaching you how things work and how it's layering on the difficulty.  The player clearly has played the level a number of times before so you can also see how player skill can take advantage of things like not moving close enough to trigger AI or rushing other units before they can become a threat.  Also don't feel like you have to copy every mechanic, just be aware of why things might tend to go that way so you don't ignore needs they might cover

Contra 4 in particular has a very well done easy difficulty mode for those not used to the demands of the genre.

Upvoted for a reason that ain't just games. One major "how to be a writer" essay said about genres of literature, "If you want to write detective novels, read a thousand detective novels; if you want to write romance, read a thousand romance novels." Part of the answer was specifying which games would be best to study for your specific case, but the bulk of it is, "Learn from the classics in whatever arena you're working in, even if you are trying to do something genuinely new."

Rather than one hit dead, short of strong bosses and special enemies, why not use injuries as a way to make things feel real. Injuries tend to slow player movement(jump lower, run slower), impede vision (blurry screen), hearing (gun shots sounds lower or louder depending) or any other the users other senses.
Or if you are definitely focused on keeping the one hit die, take lessons from Contra, frequent armor drops, lots of life drops, starting with lots of lives help. Though you have to create a good enough balance, that allows you to give the user just enough lives without the user feeling as if you are making the game too easy. User testing is a must for that option.
Another Idea from an older game I used to play, was a check point or auto save feature, when you make it to bosses.
Allowing friendly fire between enemy units: This allows the user to use explosions and other enemies fire to make the game a bit more forgiving, if they are talented enough to dodge missiles, shots etc. Which relates to predictability, another answer her discusses this a bit.
This one may be a bit far fetched, but adding vehicles (tanks, plans, cars, horses??) that can take a few shots before exploding at certain parts of the level, that may be littered with enemies.

Not very helpful, but thanks for answering anyway!


text:
What does SoC stand for?
… and no, I do not mean System-on-a-Chip.
I stumbled upon this question which was using the acronym in the context of graphics, and found myself wondering about its meaning. Neither the question nor the answer further explained the acronym, and a search on google only got me "system-on-a-chip", which I was already familiar with, and "security operations center", which I was less familiar with.
What does SoC stand for in the context of game development (and/or software engineering)?

It stands for Separation of Concerns, i.e. designing a software so that each section has a specific purpose.
As you guessed, it's a general software engineer priciple and it is not specific to game design/programming.
This is often done (and not limited to) to reduce the coupling between sections, resulting in better reusability, code clarity and (sometimes) teamwork.

Additional benefits: test-ability and composition

It's not necessarily a software thing though, it's often a network engineering thing too. Things like not having your MMORPG on the same server as your billing system and registration page for example, that's SoC too.


text:
Is there a way to easily make 3d models and textures for people with no prior experience?
I want to make a game, but I need assets. I am wondering if I should make them by myself even though I never made any textures or 3d models before. Are there technologies that allow you to easily make them? What would you recommend me to do?

You can most definitely do this, there are so many great tutorials and books for about every kind of modeling software out there. YouTube, Blender LinkedIn Learning, Pluralsight ect…
I and many others are always browsing and for and buying unique art and models to use in creations. you can then create a sight and or find all the good sites that you can place your content on and they will keep it up and selling for a small cut of profits. Just to name a couple Turbo Squid, and GameDevMarket pretty good options they have pretty wide global advertising ect. people are always browsing for unique stuff whether free or paid. Same with the Unity asset store or unreal engine marketplace those are also great spots to put art and models for creators to buy.
as far as different software options. that will be personal preference but I enjoy working with blender, probuilder in unity, gimp, cinema 4d is pretty great also. But id also get the trials and tutotorials to get some experience with some mainstream stuff like Maya, mudbox ect..
Dive in and make some good stuff and you will live the dream ;)

I am wondering if I really can since my drawing skills are kinda limited. Also, I have no idea how I can create textures for complex 3d models.

I'm definitely not a specialist in any aspect of the visual part of game development but I figured if all I did was copy others' assets then I would never learn to model or animate so I took up blender. If I were you that's what I would do. Download blender and take it from there, it's free and it'll teach you the basics of 3D modelling and animation.

Can you sell your game if you do that though?

If you make models using Blender then they're legally your assets I believe so as long as your game engine allows you you can sell it.

But you're suggesting to copy people's assets, right? What do you mean by that? Just load and save?

No I'm suggesting creating your own assets from scratch in blender.

Ah, wait, I reread the answer. Is using Blender beginner-friendly? Isn't it just like any other modelling software?

Yes it's just like any other software but it's very popular so there's an abundance of tutorials.

Are there tutorials that show you how to do armors? And what about texturing?

Look on youtube

I like the procedural approach more, I suggest Houdini or the Grasshopper plugin for Rhino, if you need more refined meshes that need hand modeling, you can polish using zBrush. It will take you longer to learn but you will have a powerful toolset that lets you iterate your geometry just by adjusting some sliders. For texturing I recommend Substance Painter as it is also procedural. There are plenty of tutorials and if you come from a programming background everything will just click, if you don't what you'll learn can definetely be applied to any kind of software development, so in any case is a win win if you go with proceduralism.


text:
Efficient way to go about acquiring game assets
I was thinking about buying assets, but I don't want to waste time and want to acquire assets as fast as possible, and acquire a large amount of them, because I want to make several different games from the assets (rpg, action, shooter, etc.) Also, I want to commercialize the game, so what would you recommend me doing?

Welcome to GDSE. What stage is your development & design at? If you haven't locked down the art / design / feel of the game, I would recommend grey boxing over acquiring assets, but if your much further along an answer focused on that solution wouldn't really adddress your problem. Also keep in mind that requests for resources (i.e. where can I find X) type questions are not considered on-topic, so you may need to edit your question.

It's also worth mentioning that the hardest part of a game is making the code and the logic work. That means, no matter how much money you spend on assets, if you don't have the code nor the experience, you'd spend way too much time coding the game. I'd suggest first making a prototype of a game, and once it's in a alpha-ish state you can think about buying assets and replacing the template ones you already have.

I'm not sure if this is on topic, but I'll try to answer anyway:
You don't need to pay for your game's assets; That's why things like the Unity Assets store, ue4 store etc.. exist ;)
When it comes to commercializing the game, you really want to check for your assets' licence/s (unless you created them yourself of course), because they tell you if and how you can use them in your game.
If the assets are not free for commercial purposes, you probably need to pay the artist who created them (again check their licence requirements).
If you don't want to create the assets yourself, there are a whole lot of websites that you can find with a simple search on the web, but for a bit of money you can pay an artist that will make exactly what you need, exactly how you want; That's the main advantage.


text:
Exclude a certain folder from Unity?
I work with a small team of three people, and we use the collaborate service within Unity to share our progress. One of the folders we have inside our Unity project is an "OffGame" folder, which includes a tool I created specifically to help with the creation of certain assets. It's not actually supposed to be part of the game, but since I'm often making changes to it, I figured I'd include it in the Unity project. The Unity project temporarily makes use of certain files inside said OffGame folder, however, once the game is done, those files will be moved outside of that folder and integrated into the game proper.
Since that OffGame folder is not supposed to be part of the game and I only included it there to share it to my teammates over the collaborate service, I don't want it to be treated like a normal folder for the game. Specifically, I don't want Unity to create a bunch of useless meta files for each file in that folder, or to act like a stray .js file in there is part of the project. I actually got compile errors because Unity kept thinking it had to include all the .js files in that folder.
How can I make Unity ignore that folder?

There's a great tool on the asset store that handles this issue. https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/tools/utilities/exclude-from-build-222791

Presumably you considered just keeping the folder / the files you want ignored outside your Assets directory entirely?

During the import process, Unity completely ignores the following files and folders in the Assets folder (or a sub-folder within it):

Hidden folders.
Files and folder which start with ..
Files and folder which end with ~.
Files and folders named cvs.
Files with the extension .tmp.

Source

So what does "import process" mean in this context? When stuff gets added to the project folder or when it's uploaded to the collaborate tool? If I add a "." at the start of my OffGame folder, will it still be uploaded?

@noClue The import process refers to Unity's asset importer that runs when you introduce a file to the project. The file will still be uploaded if it doesn't match your .collabignore file. I looked at the default and .* is not excluded (._* is!).

I tried it with an ~ at the end of my folder name (OffGame~), but the files weren't uploaded. I'll try to prepend the folder name with a "." when I get home. I thought they would all behave the same. For those who don't know how to put a dot at the start of the folder name, you need to add one at the end as well, so in my case ".OffGame.". The last dot will be removed automatically.

Nope, didn't work... it just gets completely ignored by Unity.


text:
How to port a Skyrim Legendary Edition mod to Skyrim Special Edition, and vice-versa?
There are a lot of mods I want to port, but I don't know how to go about it and do it properly to avoid crashes, etc. Could you put all of the steps and relevant information here so I can use it as a future reference? I am trying to port a major mod with scripts, 3d models, new items, new spells and whatnot.

There might not be a universal recipe that works for all ports. Can you edit your question to give a concrete example of one problem you've encountered on a specific port, and we'll try to suggest ways to solve that issue? If that solution doesn't work for the next port, you can always ask a new question about that next specific issue.

To extend the excellent comment by @DMGregory, you're asking for a guide on something that you haven't even started yet. If you want a guide go to the forums of the Nexus Mods and the like. You'll probably need to piece a few articles and forum posts together to get yourself started, then return here with specific questions if you run into trouble.

There is quite some elaborate process description available.
The gist of it is, ESMify the masters, open in the SE CK, resave. Use SE NifOptimizer on the skinned meshes. Use the SE version of the archiving tool.
By skinned meshes I refer to creatures and armors -- anything that's rigged to Skyrim's vanilla animations via bones and joints. I would run NifOptimizer on everything except particle effects for good practice.
https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/17990
Changes from LE to SE:

vertex definitions for meshed and bounding meshes for particles (all quads)
textures formats were a bit changed due to the change of direct x sdk
(tga formate no longer supported, dds compression slightly changed)

So the involved nodes are:

Nitristrips, who are deprecated
Nitrishapes that become bstrishapes
Niskin instances that have the new vertex data
Niparticles due to the change from the old bounding box to the bsbound

For porting to Xbox

https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrimspecialedition/mods/23316
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIByRdNXgYM
μTorrent Download: http://www.utorrent.com/
Launch.ini Download: http://www.mediafire.com/download/rm6...
Xbdm.xex Download: http://www.mediafire.com/download/k18...
Memedit.xex Download:http://www.mediafire.com/download/229...
Xbox 360 Neighborhood Download: http://www.mediafire.com/download/kyg...**

For conversion of the ESP for SE Xbox, you open up the CK in Version Control,
and check out every single form from the esm you are trying to convert. Then you save that to a plugin. Then you run it through the auto clean in xedit to remove any identical to master (itm) records. Then you merge the resulting plugin back into the master (ESM) file as in a normal merge. The new esm will have the correct version number, and all of the forms that are different in SE will be updated.
Best of success
Post Scriptum:
You cannot "port back" to LE. The updates on esm/esp entries and meshes are irreversible.

While the comments sum up how this question isn't particularly valuable for this site I will add an answer that I think can be valuable for those searching the same thing.
Many (I would go as far to say a majority) of the mods available on the Nexus for Skyrim SE are ports of existing LE mods. In fact, if you head over and look at both Nexus sites you'll find many of the "New Files" and "Hot Files" are on both, because modders tend to create them for both games simultaneously. As such, you have a plethora of existing sample cases to learn from.
Download mods from both sites that have parts of what you intend to do and examine the differences. If you want to port a mod that adds new models, find an already ported mod that adds new models. If it's scripts then do the same with that. Many mods will only need opening with the SE Creation Kit, then saving anew, to complete the port.
A key outlier here is mods that use SKSE. SKSE had to be entirely rewritten for SE and was renamed SKSE64 (because SE is 64 bit, compared to 32 bit LE). As such, while the developers of SKSE intended to create the plugin with an identical API to LE it's vital that all usage of SKSE within the mod are completely checked in-game running SKSE64 to ensure they work. Otherwise the scripts will need to be modified to match the new API.
Another point is to look out for dependencies. It's great if you port a mod to LE but if it has a dependency that hasn't been ported you'll have trouble running it (or parts of it) at all. Make sure any dependencies have been ported (by yourself or someone else) and that all references within the mod point to the ported dependency.
I would say to just dive in. Start with an LE mod loaded into the SE CK and save it - see what happens when you run the game. Troubleshoot any errors and if you can't find an answer, by all means come back and ask another question here (with a more specific problem in mind!).


text:
How to make fighting roster actually fair and FEEL fair?
I plan on creating a fighting game in the future, and I'm wondering how to make a roster functionally fair, and feel fair. You see, Super Smash Brothers Ultimate is functionally fair (I think), but at certain times, it doesn't feel fair (partially because I suck at the game).
Mario's up smash is one of the few that can't hit people on the lower platforms of battlefield, however, it still feels fair game somehow (up tilt is my guess). However, when playing against Ness, it can feel unfair to play because the other player can just spam PK Fire (side special) and then smash attack them at high enough HP. In other words, it is fair, but not fun.
How can I avoid something being spammed feeling unfair when creating a fighting game, and all the other moves of characters feel (and actually be) fair?

SSB is far from fair. There is a tier list for the characters for a reason.

I get the tier lists, but far from fair is an exaggeration.

Playtesting
A large, commercial game like SSB will go through hundreds if not thousands of hours of playtesting prior to release to tweak the strength, size, duration, etc. of individual attacks to find an approximation of what is 'fair'.
Balance Passes
A balance pass is a post-release patch which adjusts the relative strengths of characters / attacks / items / etc.; it functions similarly to the tweaks made during playtesting but is usually more drastic and based on observing actual player statistics.

How can you achieve these with your game?
It's unlikely you'll have the time and/or money to do large scale playtesting, but there are a few ways you can make the task easier on yourself:

Start small - it will be much easier to balance characters if you add them one-by-one, because you've already got a metric for what 'fair' is with the existing characters.
Get friends / family / pets / anyone else to test the game from the moment it's playable - the more feedback you have, the more likely you'll get a balanced viewpoint.
Collect statistics - when developing your game, make sure you include some functionality to record key stats. The stats that matter to your game may vary, but things like which character wins, average fight duration, most popular / most effective attacks, etc.

An important part to a mechanic feeling fair is the feeling that you (the target) can do something about what's happening. I.e. any mechanic (Ness side special) must have some sort of counterplay.
It's a design decision on whether that counterplay is specific or more general - Super Smash Brothers prefers more general counterplay mechanics in dodging and shield to avoid attacks, and falloff to make spamming a single mechanic less effective (as you use an ability more, it does less damage; as you dodge more, dodges provide less invincibility, lock you out for longer, etc). To continue the original example, there are a variety of general counterplay maneuvers to a player using Ness to spam side special and followup with a smash later (in order from general to specific):

As Ness uses side special, it does less and less damage, so the use is less punishing (every ability has this same mechanic)
The ability has an animation (as all abilities), which puts a window of vulnerability on Ness (every ability has this same mechanic)
Side special is dodge-able, though its persistence makes it less good to block. (Mostly generic counterplay)
Side special is a projectile, so any projectile reflect or absorb abilities will stop it (generic to any projectiles)

So, more generally - to make a fighting roster actually fair, you must include counterplay to any given mechanic. Not necessarily perfect counterplay (all of the above still rely on the receiver being "good enough" to execute on the counterplay strategies), but some counterplay.
To make a roster feel fair, you must make counterplay strategies accessible. It's one thing to have dodging/blocking/projectile reflection in the game, it's another thing for those mechanics to be available. If you can dodge an ability but the game never tells you that "dodge" is an action (or how to do it), then it's not an accessible counterplay mechanic. There are a variety of ways to make mechanics accessible, for example:

A tutorial can go a long way in showing players mechanics and how to use them
Help pages to refresh memory on what mechanics exist without having to replay the tutorial and learning how to walk again. A tutorial that's setup in steps that are each individually replayable can assist this as well.

i.e. a help page detailing "this is a dodge, this is what it does and how to use it [with a short video to help players recognize times they've dodged or enemies have dodged]", and then a playable exercise to show off dodging and give specific practice

Periodic random tips noting counterplay mechanics, or the ins-and-outs of them can be really helpful

A tip saying "dodges exist" isn't great (though depending on genre and target audience, a tip saying "If you're being hit too much, try dodging!" could go over well)
A tip mentioning that "Y character's X ability can't be dodged, but blocks are effective!" reminds the player to dodge, reminds the player to block, and gives the player insight into how they should be countering another specific instance.

Even using the "show don't tell" method can work well with this - if you have AI's make full use of the counterplay mechanics you expose, that can help players realize what those are and how to use them (you start realizing how good dodging can be if you're doing something and the enemy AI is dodging it constantly).

A. I'm aware of staling, but that doesn't change the fact that once you're caught in one you're likely going to be caught in a crud ton of others. The vulnerability frames are small. B: I wish ultimate had a good tutorial... C: Okey dokey. Tips on loading screens. D: I'll be sure to include that when I start on the game(which isn't anytime soon.) Though, when I was Ness, none of the lvl 9. AIs were able to even come close to getting out, or dodging/deflecting, a well timed PK-Fire spam(except for when I was facing another Ness).


text:
Ideal 3D platformer controls for Keyboard + Mouse
I am developing a 3D platformer, and I know that controller is optimal for the precise movement, but I don't feel players should have to buy a controller just to experience a 3D platformer that is available for PC.
I get that WASD to move and SPACEBAR to jump is all good(and SHIFT to crouch), but I'm a little lost for the rest. I was thinking JKL could do some stuff, but then that ruins the point of a mouse, so maybe one set of controls for Keyboard + Mouse, and another for keyboard alone?
Here are my current controls for controller:
Potential Ideas:
Left Stick/WASD - move(obviously)
Right Stick/arrow keys/mouse(maybe + right click?) - camera
A(gamepad)/SPACE(maybe 'j' as well?) - Jump
Triggers/SHIFT - crouch
(No need to worry about start + select)
Ones I'm stuck on(all of these are gamepad)
Right Stick down - first person view
B - Attack
X - Dive
Y - Use power-up
Bumpers - Snap Camera behind
D-Pad Up/Down - zoom camera
D-Pad Left-Right - snap camera 45 degrees to left/right
I tried looking at other examples(e.g. A hat in time), but those games have a much different move set than mine, and wouldn't quite work.

This doesn't look to me like a question that's likely to have a "verifiable/correct" answer that fits our Q&A format here. Different folks prefer different control mappings. The best thing you can do is ensure you have robust control remapping options — then your defaults can be whatever you find feels good & intuitive to your team and your playtesters, and players who find an alternative arrangement more intuitive can remap to their heart's content.

Definitely need configurable controls. I use WERD to move instead of WASD. Drove me nuts when The Witness wouldn't let me remap it. That game just had a couple presets; people in other countries with different keyboard layouts hated that.

@DMGregory, "verifiable/correct" is a bit fuzzy here, but there are definite conventions that players expect in an FPS because the vast majority of FPS games map the vast majority of their keys the same. Knowing these common conventions is one of the core principles of UI/UX design.  While using "X" vs "Shift" to crouch may be trivial, using something like "T" to crouch would be a major UI/UX flaw; so, there is still a measurable rightness and wrongness to default key-mapping.

"I know that controller is optimal for the precise movement" [citation needed] In most games with a console and PC release that I've seen, all professional players and speedrunners use PC.

This isn't about PC vs Console, this is about KB + M.

As the comments suggest, taking an American keyboard mapping for granted is a problem;so, you ideally want to have a configurable keyset, but American mappings are domanate enough to make since for default settings.
First things first: FPS almost always map to the mouse in place of the right analogue.  This actually makes the game more user friendly than a controller for most PC gamers.  Most of these controls you are unsure about normally map to the mouse:
left-click - attack
right-click - use power-up (special attack)
Scroll-wheel - zoom
Scroll-wheel-click - Snap Camera behind (I'm assuming this is to reset your view)
Dive, look left, and look right are less conventional.  But, there are some general guidelines that can help mapping less conventional buttons intuitively:
Q,E,Z,X,C,shift,ctrl,alt: These are buttons you may use a lot, especially while moving.  So theses are often used for things like strafing, crouching, sprinting, swapping weapons, etc.
R,T,F,G,V,B: These are your tier 2 buttons, things you may need to hit here and there in the midst of battle, but don't need to focus on like reload, pick-up weapons, etc.
Other keys are often used for out-of-battle stuff like M for mini-map, I for inventory, etc.

Some/most engines can identify keys by layout-independent key locations. If you do that no having configurable controls is even less of a problem.


text:
Unity3D: Replicating SM64 turning movement into Unity
Brief Summary: I want to recreate Super Mario 64 turning movement into unity without the clunky movement I currently have. And I would also love how to implement the camera rotation system mentioned below.
Troubles: I get lost when thinking into movement algorithms for unity. Like my character won't respond to camera relative movement appropriately. I'll provide a link to a video I made comparing my current basic unity controls to Super Mario 64 if you wish to see the full comparison between the two. And in this video I also mention stuff I think I can do to replicate the things I want. Youtube Link to my comparison video
In-Depth Explanation of the problems with my current movement:
[TurnSpeed ~ My Character turn speed is actually decent. I can increase the value of it to mimic the instant snap turning Mario does when he has a input value of 0. Now when movement is being made, the characters simulate the smooth turning Mario does when given a value of 1 on horizontal input and 1 on vertical input (I usually clamp these values to make it more smooth for people on controllers). Mario: Also as a bonus, when Mario does make a instant snap turn; the camera slowly rotates itself behind the player again to give them the view of the direction they are heading. Estimate Solution: I would love to learn to how exactly make this but so far my guess is getting the direction the player is heading and use that information to rotate the camera using lerp to get it in the right position.]
My Code: I will provide my code for my progress so far in two different fashions: A clean basic movement version on here and a separate code link to see it all.
Full Code Links: CharacterController BasicMovement, and Basic Camera Controls
public Transform T_Player;
private CharacterController CC_PlayerCC;
public float F_CamTurnSpeed;
public float F_CamDistance;
public float F_CamTilt;
public float F_CamTiltLowest;
public float F_CamTiltHighest;
public float F_DirectionItsHeading;
public float F_PlayerHeight;

void start()
{
  CC_PlayersCC = GetComponent<CharacterController>();
}

void update()
{
    Input();
    CalculateCamera();
    CalculateGround();
    Move();
    Gravity();
    Jump();

    CC_PlayersCC.Move(V3_Velocity * Time.deltaTime);
}

void Input()
{
  V2_Input = new Vector2(Input.GetAxis("Horizontal_Keyboard"), Input.GetAxis("Vertical_Keyboard"));

  V2_Input = Vector2.ClampMagnitude(V2_Input, 1);
}

void CalculateCamera()
{
    V3_CamForwardDirection = T_CameraObj.forward;
    V3_CamRightDirection = T_CameraObj.right;
    V3_CamForwardDirection.y = 0;
    V3_CamRightDirection.y = 0;
    V3_CamForwardDirection = V3_CamForwardDirection.normalized;
    V3_CamRightDirection = V3_CamRightDirection.normalized;
}

void CalculateGround()
{
    if (CC_PlayersCC.isGrounded)
    {
        B_PlayerIsGrounded = true;
    }
    else
    {
        B_PlayerIsGrounded = false;
    }
}

void Move()
{
    V3_IntendedDirection = V3_CamForwardDirection * V2_Input.y + V3_CamRightDirection * V2_Input.x;
    F_CurrentTurnSpeed = V3_Velocity.magnitude / 5;
    F_PlayerTurnSpeed = Mathf.Lerp(F_PlayerHighestTurnSpeed, F_PlayerLowestTurnSpeed, F_CurrentTurnSpeed);
    if (V2_Input.magnitude > 0)
    {
        Q_PlayerRotation = Quaternion.LookRotation(V3_IntendedDirection);

        transform.rotation = Quaternion.Lerp(transform.rotation, Q_PlayerRotation, F_PlayerTurnSpeed * Time.deltaTime);
    }

    V3_VelocityXZ = V3_Velocity;
    V3_VelocityXZ.y = 0;
    V3_VelocityXZ = Vector3.Lerp(V3_VelocityXZ, transform.forward * V2_Input.magnitude * F_PlayerSpeed, F_Accerlation * Time.deltaTime);
    V3_Velocity = new Vector3(V3_VelocityXZ.x, V3_Velocity.y, V3_VelocityXZ.z);
}

void Gravity()
{
    if (B_PlayerIsGrounded)
    {
        V3_Velocity.y = F_OnGroundGravity; //OnGround Gravity
    }
    else
    {
        V3_Velocity.y -= F_PlayerGravity * Time.deltaTime;
        V3_Velocity.y = Mathf.Clamp(V3_Velocity.y, -10, 10);
    }
}

void Jump()
{
    if (B_PlayerIsGrounded == true)
    {
        if (Input.GetButtonDown("Jump"))
        {
            V3_Velocity.y = F_PlayerJumpHeight;
        }
    }
}

void OnControllerColliderHit(ControllerColliderHit hit)
{
    F_CurrentAngle = Vector3.Angle(Vector3.up, hit.normal);
}

Where did you get the level asset? Did you make it yourself?

@Vakore I got it from this website https://www.models-resource.com/nintendo_64/supermario64/model/8561/
No, I did not make it but I can easily do that. I usually use blender and concept art to make my models. Now if it is a level then I usually make sections of that design into models; then I put it together. I can easily take the model apart and remake the level itself but what is the point if I can't even make the controls yet.

Thanks for taking the time to improve the question. :)

I'm working on a 3D platformer as well, and have studied SM64 a lot in the process of making, however, I'm not exactly replicating it, so I don't have the code on hand. However, I can tell you several things:
A: Mario moves forward based on the direction he is facing, and if you turn left on the movement stick while going forward, he will quickly, but noticeably, be in a rotation state, resulting in a curve to start fully moving left and not forward. You're going to use transform.forward a lot in this  case, especially for diving and long jumps. A little something like this:
marioVelocity += transform.forward * acceleration;
Note that transform.forward and transform.right are both Vector3s, not floats. Another thing to note is that when when you slam the stick in the opposite direction you are moving, Mario will enter a short slide animation to change direction, and if the player presses 'A' as this happens, it does a side ward somersault. To make this happen, you should check if the absolute value of the rotation that needs to happen is greater than 160 degrees(give or take).
Also, when Mario is completely standing still and you start moving, he will instantly snap into the rotation you want to go in with no transition. A few if statements can help with that. Here is a little code on how to do that:
Vector3 rotateDirection = (camera.forward * Input.GetAxis("Vertical")) + (camera.right * Input.GetAxis("Horizontal"));
if (marioVelocity.magnitude == 0f) {
Quaternion newRotation = Quaternion.LookRotation(new Vector3(rotateDirection.x, 0f, rotateDirection.z));
transform.rotation = Quaternion.Slerp(transform.rotation, newRotation, rotationSpeed * Time.deltaTime);//You're going to make rotationSpeed super low, like 0.0001(not sure if 0 works) or super high. I forget which
}

When Mario is in the air he doesn't rotate, but rather faces the direction that he was on the ground last. You're going to want something like this at the begging of your code public Transform camera so that you can get the rotation of your camera(or what the camera is pivoting off of) so that you can use camera.right and camera.forward in the air, and for getting rotation reference on the ground.
For wall jumps however, that is a little more complex. I recommend this video for more reference.
Diving, long jumping, and triple jumps are pretty simple, as diving you jump test marioVelocity.magnitude to see if he is fast enough to perform a dive when the player presses 'B' otherwise kick or punch, long jumps if the player is crouching, has some velocity, and presses 'A', and triple jumps you just have a float that goes down, and when Mario lands again he has a short time to press 'A' to perforom a double or triple jump.

My Line Responses:
[Response to lines (1-3)]Sweet to hear that you working on the same genre too.
[Response to lines (4-9)] I didn't notice that, and I have done that before. But it was for more simplistic movement. Either way it seems that I can use this method of storing velocity values again.

[Response to lines (10-14)] But isn't there programming involved with mario slightly carrying his speed after suddenly turning? Like acceleration would a easy way to modify that to be like sliding.
[Response to lines (15-16)] Wow, I thought of that but I just didn't think it was how it was done. I thought it was part of the movement system itself instead of being a simple snap rotation.

[Response to lines (17-20)] I didn't notice that either. but I have already done something like that before. I just didn't think to do it with this too much.
[Response to line (21)] Thanks for the good source on wall jumps.
[Response to lines (22-26)] I looked into that a while back when I was interested in learning how they created the triple jump. I usually forget that I manipulate information revolved around magnitude and velocity. velocity I usually only bother to look at for basic jumping but not much else.

Could you help me find a good way to replicate the turning movement more? i haven't gotten home yet to practice and debug some concepts you helped me think of to get that to copy right. But the instant rotation snap is definitely useful information you provided.

I have the instant rotation snap added to the code.

Ya, I see where your going with this. I have a code posted above which did somewhat of the same thing. But you simplified without much requirement for anything else. So I need to only snap when magnitude is 0 but when movement is being made then I need to not have it snap. In my video, the character somewhat copies the turning mario does when moving but I am still unsure on how to make it close to it.

A: That is correct B: Just have a separate rotationSpeed variable and use the same code with a modified 'if' statement to check if it isn't zero if (marioVelocity.magnitude != 0f) {do the rotation thing but second rotationSpeed variable;}

I think I have a solid turning but I do need to get the other stuff down to really get things going. I only wanted to learn from this too. So with that objective, I have to say you helped me out on that and I am thankful that you provided good information to get started on this. I will be posting more questions about this subject but on the other aspects of it.

Glad you found what you are looking for! I must warn you though, don't ask for too many things at once otherwise your question can be flagged as Too Broad. Keep it simple, but be clear.

Gotcha, and I saw the result of that after this post. I will be sure to make these questions more focused on what I am asking. Now here I go again on video editing and recording footage into gifs.
P.s. I really didn't bother video editing that much. If I did, the video would have been more professionally made, but I don't got all the time in the world to do dev stuff.


text:
Simple Automation of Car Path Finding Between 2 Points
I would think that it would be simple to have a car drive from A to B, but apparently I haven't been able to figure it out. My goal is to have a car begin at a certain position and angle, calculate the best path to another position with another angle, and then travel there.
Please keep in mind that this car has a minimum turning radius, so it can't simply change angles by spinning. Also, I would like to see what I can do with the car only traveling in a single direction, ie. no reversing.
I have read over many grid-based algorithms, but I don't see how I can translate those to what I need, which is most likely a series of arcs and straight lines.
The closest thing I have have found is Dubins Interval, which seems closest to what I need, though I believe it is old and has probably long since been replaced. I have sketched out paths using this method, but have had trouble translating it to programmatic form (C++). I believe the rough idea is to line up the minimum steering circles of the start and goal, start turning from the start until you are on the line, head towards the goal, and then either simply go onto the goal circle and curve it, or project an additional circle on the same line and use it to end up on the goal circle in the opposite direction.
If anyone knows of any examples, code preferred, of simple car driving path examples, I would appreciate it.

Are you just asking how to get a car to point in the right direction? If so, vector subtraction gives you the direction the car wants to face, and vector cross-product will tell you if the car should turn left or right to face that direction.

We have some existing Q&A covering this topic. If you find it doesn't adequately address your needs, please edit your question to clarify how your needs differ from what's covered there, and we can re-open it.

I was asking how to plot out the path so that I could actually navigate it, but I see that I have made a mistake in asking a duplicate question. If anyone has the ability to do so, please delete this question.


text:
How to rotate CharacterController on slope
I'm trying to rotate my characterController player on a slope on the 'x' and 'z' axises, however things aren't going so well.
The player does rotate, but if I move and look in another direction, the characterController will still be on the same axis, and won't look down an up slope, and instead will be looking up a down slope.
void Update ()
{
   Vector3 rotateDirection = (camera.forward * Input.GetAxis("Vertical"))
                           + (camera.right * Input.GetAxis("Horizontal"));

   Quaternion newRotation = Quaternion.LookRotation(
                               new Vector3(rotateDirection.x, 0f, rotateDirection.z));
   transform.rotation = Quaternion.Slerp(
                               transform.rotation, newRotation, rotSpeed * Time.deltaTime);
 }

private void OnControllerColliderHit(ControllerColliderHit hit)
{
      transform.rotation = Quaternion.Euler(hit.transform.rotation.eulerAngles.x,
                   transform.rotation.eulerAngles.y, hit.transform.rotation.eulerAngles.z);
}

Also, it doesn't work at all with spheres and terrain since their rotation is zero. Anyone know how to achieve what I am talking about? Also, the goal is to allow for the 'y' axis to be free and do what it needs to in void Update().

Unrelated to selecting your rotation, you're not adjusting your Lerp for deltaTime correctly.

To orient ourselves to our ground surface, we'll need to establish what direction is "out" from the ground we're standing on. So let's set aside a member variable to track that.
Vector3 groundNormal;

The safest way to populate this is likely with a raycast down toward your feet each frame. If you want to continue using OnControllerColliderHit then you should include some test first to distinguish hits from the ground vs hits from walls or other obstacles that should not change your ground normal. You can use physics layers or tags, for example.
Once you have a contact point that you're confident represents ground (either a RaycastHit or a ControllerColliderHit), you can capture its normal as your current groundNormal:
groundNormal = hit.normal;

Now, we can compute a local coordinate space relative to this surface and our camera perspective, using the TurretLookRotation method shown in this answer:
Quaternion inputFrame = TurretLookRotation(camera.forward, groundNormal);

We can use this to transform our input into world space:
Vector3 localInput = new Vector3(
                           Input.GetAxis("Horizontal"),
                           0f,
                           Input.GetAxis("Vertical")
                         );

Vector3 worldInput = inputFrame * localInput;

Then construct our new rotation using this direction in the plane of our surface, and an "up" vector pointing out of our surface:
Quaternion newRotation = Quaternion.LookRotation(worldInput, groundNormal);

Note here we've never tried to break apart an Euler angle triplet into separate angles to mix and match. This will almost never have your desired effect. It's much more reliable to describe and compute your rotations in terms of quaternions or basis vectors as illustrated above.

I'll test this tomorrow, thanks for answering!

I did test it on March 3rd, however I forgot to respond. It doesn't go very well with my code for some reason. The rotation goes all wonky in the air, and hardly rotates properly on the slopes.

That's not enough information for us to be able to diagnose the specific problem and propose solutions.


text:
How to make healing in an exploration game interesting
I'm creating a game with a heavy focus on exploration, though I'm at a bit of a loss for healing.
The problem is that I don't like the idea of enemies randomly dropping health, as this usually results in grinding when at low health and not near any healing stations(Metroid, Axiom Verge), and I don't want to copy the Soul/Focus system from Hollow Knight(Combat system has already been stolen by me :3), but Hollow Knight is the only game I've played with a focus on exploration that made healing interesting.
I've also thought of auto-regeneration, however that can easily lead to the player cowarding during a boss fight while they heal, and that would break the flow of the gameplay.
I've also considered something like striking a foe heals 1/8th of a health point, however this leads to the player feeling less tense after they take a gain 1/8th which will keep them from dying if they get hit again, and it makes the game feel like its all offense and little defense.
I've also though about an items approach where the player has to eat something or drink something to heal, however this doesn't really encourage healing as once you run out of items, you can no longer heal until you get some more(Legend of Zelda).
I've also though about no healing at all, however I noticed that when exploring and then you take a dumb hit before a hard boss, or a dumb hit before the boss gets hard(cough Cuphead cough), the player will just either commit suicide or run back to a healing station.
What can I do to make healing interesting, and not break the flow of gameplay?
This is a 2D platformer, and jumping is really important in the combat.

Could you elaborate more on the problems with healing through combat? To me it sounds like a risk/ reward tradeoff. However, your description sounds like once the player heals even a small bit, they are no longer in jeopardy of dying. Could you clarify any design assumptions that play into this?

Diablo and Zelda offer in combat healing as a thing you have to go fetch mid-combat, making for some interesting tactical decisions

@Pikalek Basically, I'm looking for risk/reward healing. In Hollow Knight, you are vulnerable as you heal, and it costs soul. You get hit during this time, you lose the soul, and health.

@MooingDuck How so in Zelda? I've only played Ocarina of Time and the original on the NES, and in both of those you usually just pause and then select, then use it and you gain HP.

@Vakore: Ah, I was just playing Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker and others have pots in the corners of the boss rooms that you can break that have health or supplies. In some games you balance saving them vs the boss destroying them before you can use them.

@MooingDuck I'll keep that in mind while creating my game. I already figure out how I'm going to do my healing, though I might do something like that for mana maybe?

Do any of these answers suggest making healing items easy to get, but super annoying animations to sit through and have to watch if you use the crappy ones? Honestly, I'd rather grind then have to sit through watching FFVIII's 45 second Diablos GF animation for the eleven thousandth time....

None of then do. I'll keep this in mind. 2. Language Mazura.

Does your game have an energy type resource (stamina, mana, or whatever) tied to skill usage?

Check out Desktop Dungeons - exploring the dungeon regenerates health (and mana), however there is a limited amount of exploration. This leads to interesting mechanics where you can fight an enemy, explore to regain health, and then come back. The trick is that enemies also regenerate health when you explore! I think that they've dealt with your problem in a really elegant manner

@Xavon_Wrentaile I figured out a system. It has two forms of mana, one which you get by hitting enemies(Hollow Knight), and it is used for mainly the progression stuff you need to get to a new area, but when full, you can do the heal move(which I shalln't give any more details on) and another regenerates overtime(and during screen transitions), and is used for (mainly) optional abilities, like the magic meter in Shovel Knight: Plaque of Shadows, except slower.

Have you explored the healing system (link to the Steam discussion forum) in La-Mulana (also a 2D action platformer/Metroidvania)? (Basically, there are no consumable healing items and no health drop, but alternative ways to get healed, either fully-healed or temporary)

@AndrewT. I'll be sure to check that out.

(To sum up La Mulana's healing system, it's essentially Exp. like in RPGs, except you get fully healed instead of gaining a level when you fill the bar.  The "Exp." bar offers no protection in and of itself, if you run out of HP, you die regardless of whether your Exp. bar is empty or 1 point away from being full.)

Perhaps you can add some non-conventional healing system.
Like for example :

Health steal -> percentage of health gained = percentage of enemy health lost, and varies with enemy level.
Every nth hit -> every nth hit gains certain health with certain weapon/class/etc.
Implement the common methods -> but minimal like 1-5%

Think something like these, maybe ?

You just gave me an idea with your wording... and the idea might solve my issue. I'll try it later today. +1 2. Said that already, but thanks for the weapons/classes idea. 3. You gave me an idea with the 1-5%, I could heal 1-5% of one segment of the player's HP when they attack an enemy(or if the idea you gave me works, I can just use this for mana and not be called a HK clone).

I don't see how the advantages/disadvantages of "health steal" are any different from "enemies drop health on death"

@BlueRaja Kill enemy: Health, Slappa enemy while running: Health

@Vakore How is that not the same type of grinding/farming you were trying to avoid in your question?

@ChrisHayes Killing enemies randomly drops health. Attacking an enemy gives some health, and you don't have to stop to completely kill one. Just run, and while you're climbing a tower or something, you just do one swoop and keep going. Also, enemies you do have to kill will give you health. When you have to kill enemies that randomly drop health(or even if it isn't random), you have to do a lot of stopping.

I think you need to consider this at a more fundamental level: what is the gameplay purpose of having a health system in your game?
A conventional health system serves two purposes: (1) it gives a staged failure state to combat, and (2) it serves to create long term resource management with health between fights.
You say you want your game to be exploration heavy. Why is health and death part of your game at all? Is it just there to add challenge? How does the player losing health and then dying in combat support this goal? Does carrying injury from one combat to another support your goals for your game? If not, why use a conventional health system at all? Why not, just for example, have an indestructible character and make the challenge finding a way to get past enemies at all? Why not have being hit cost you some resource, like gold, instead of being a countdown to death?
In order to give a thoughtful design answer to how healing should work you first need to know why the player is healing at all.

I already know why I want health:
A: For Challenge, and what causes failure. Also to give player incentive to re-explore areas when trying to reclaim their money(or whatever I decide they lose) so that they might spot something important they missed.
B: Tension, and to give the world a sense of danger
C: A none-convention way(such as Specter Knight New Game+) may ruin the atmosphere I'm trying to create.

C: None conventional way works. I was wrong.

@Vakore "Challenge" is vague.  You can have challenge in games without health.  And the two kinds of health (staged failure in fights, and long term resource management) give two kinds of "Challenge"; saying "I want Challenge" neither requires health nor describes what kind of health to use!  "Trying to reclaim their money" -- is that about death?  Death doesn't require health (either short or long term).  Jack's points are on topic: figure out as accurately as possible what you want the Health system to do to figure out how it should work.

@Yakk The health system is what needs to be managed, challenge being keeping it from hitting 0. I'm aware games like Starcraft's challenge and Smash Bros' isn't necessarily health, however, due to the atmosphere of what I'm working on, and the mechanics, I think health is the best thing to lost when you get hit. Otherwise, you usually end up in the boat of Kirby's Epic Yarn.(And yes, I'm aware of exceptions). I also came up with a good system for healing thanks to one of the posts. Also, trying to reclaim money is about death.

@Vakore For your specific example, you mention not wanting life steal due to it being too offense only, and you also don't want grinding, farming, returning to safety, or waiting for various other reasons.  In that case, what it sounds like you want is for exploring to recover health.  Perhaps you can find places to heal with limited healing supplies, thus in order to recover you need to explore.  It could be you can return to a place once or twice to heal but after that you must push forward.  For another explore->recover example, look at the game Desktop Dungeons where FoW = HP/MP recovery

It should be noted that the points ABC OP gives here can all be achieved with any kind of health system, it doesn't narrow it down one bit. Even a Call of Duty-style "don't get hit for 2 seconds and you auto heal" would achieve that. And the point about reclaiming after death, health actually works against that - after all, that was the place where you spent so much of your health resource that you died.

@Lunin I already figured out something, and its similar to Hollow Knight, and it somewhat involves health steal, but its different enough that I can call it my own.

@R.Schmitz That usually works for games where your health goes from 100% to 0 in less than a second.

You mentioned having thought about auto-regeneration and your issue with that was the possibility of a player, while in the middle of a fight, running around while they auto-regenerate health.
Have you considered auto-regeneration only when not-in-combat (aka out-of-combat)? This is an approach taken in many games.
You could combine this with one or more of your other ideas for a way for players to heal while in-combat.

You also mentioned having thought about using healing items, but not wanting the player to feel discouraged from using them, for fear of running out of healing items and having to go collect more.
What if you combined this approach with one of an infinite-use heal? For example, an unlimited-use item that heals a small amount of health, in addition to a limited-use item that heals a large amount of health.
Another approach could be a healing skill/item that can be used over and over, but with a cooldown (or some other cost, such as mana). That way, the player would be able to regularly use their healing skill (when strategically applicable).

You could have auto-regeneration, but discourage players from waiting for it all the time by making it very slow regeneration. Then have other healing methods that encourage or promote the way you'd like the player to play (like the idea to heal when you hit an enemy)

The problem is, the player is always 'in combat'. When exploring, bats or Shreks or whatever will be charging at the player most of the time. Also, when exploring, and then a boss surprises the player(which I plan to happen), and the player is low on health, they might become frustrated with the fact that they are low on health. If they knew that a boss was going to pop out, they would've stopped exploring and waited and healed. See(Hollow Knight spoilers): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNgdkrgry0g to know what I mean(except in hollow knight it isn't frustrating).

Edited with a couple more ideas

How do you suggest I go about mana then? If enemies randomly drop it, then it feels grindy, going back to another one of my problems. If it is gained by attacking enemies, back to my "Hollow Knight copycat" problem. A cooldown does work, but again, back to player cowarding problem. I really appreciate you trying to help, but apparently this question is a little harder to answer than I thought...

If you wanted to add mana, it would be a separate pool, like health. However, it'll lead you back to the same problem of the player doing what they can to give it time to regenerate so they could use their heal again.

I looked into the infinite use health thing, and it leads right back to cowarding. :/ Soon my only option is may be "I am now HK copycat called Suction Cup Man IV's revenge of Final Fantasy Qeyiohsnbogillion", or go for a faulty one...

You could have auto-regeneration, but discourage players from waiting for it all the time by making it very slow regeneration. Then have other healing methods that encourage or promote the way you'd like the player to play (like the idea to heal when you hit an enemy)

The unlimited healing item idea reminds me of Dark Souls 2. The Estus flask had limited uses, but could be replenished freely

@Vakore: Allow rapid healing and mana recovery when "in camp", with a proviso that camping takes relatively little "player" time, but may use up a significant amount of "game" time.  One could also have slow healing and mana recovery when not in camp, but with the proviso that enemies also recover with time, but do so faster than the player.  If one cowers in the middle of a boss fight to regain health or mana, one might avoid imminent death, but the enemy would be back up to full strength afterward.

There is a platformer called Fallout Equestria where you are a pony and can get bandages, healing potions, medical kits, etc.  You need the skills to use them, and there are healing drugs and boosters, some require skill levels (more skill heals more).  When you take damage, it goes to head, body, legs or blood.  You can go to a safe base and pay to heal or can try and get things to heal - or die and go to 50% health.  Damage causes disabilities (head: can't cast spells, legs: can't run or jump, body or blood: you die (& I it interacts drugs too to make some dangerous to use).

There's lots of examples out there in 2D platforming, it's really a question of how you want healing to be "interesting"?  I would agree with suggestions that "skillful" play should be rewarded, but also give the player enough opportunities to use resources and play strategically.
A few thoughts:

DeadCells uses a "flask" system where you fill up between levels (or healing station in your case) and can then heal a limited number of times using it.  It also requires the player to stand still for a few seconds, making it tricky (not impossible) to use during combat.
Mario.  You gain "health" (and abilities) by getting power ups.  Getting hit loses these abilities/power ups, instead of you dying immediately.
Health steal/vampire.  Kinda interesting, if your theme is right for it.  But you've got to balance the game on the premise that you hit a lot more than you get hit, e.g. that 'slow, tanky' bosses become relatively easier.
You could look at making healing a limited resource that costs you something (e.g. points, gold, items whatever)
Some kind of special heal attack that is relatively difficult to hit with (long wind-up), and causes player to be vulnerable if they miss (long wind-down).  It has a reasonable cooldown and/or cost.  Heal amount is dependent on the health/difficulty of the opponent hit.  Could be a nice balance of risk/reward.  (i.e. I'm on low health, do I risk trying to land my heal on the boss?)

You could combine 3+5 together. A Vampire hitting someone with a sword isn't going to heal, but "going in for a drink" would leave them quite exposed, so that would be an interesting trade-off to work with.

Limit healing resources and put any additional resources into new, unexplored areas. Create the incentive where if a player wants to heal, they have to press on into more of the map.
You can do this a few ways:

Have physical healing locations on the map, but cap the health they restore. Many games (like Metroid) have healing rooms, but they provide unlimited health, encouraging the player to backtrack when in danger. Instead, make them limited use.
For example, in Moonlighter, each floor of the dungeon has a healing pond that restores a set amount of HP. Once this limit is hit, the pond is "used up" and no longer heals. The cap is also relatively low (a little less than the player's max HP)
The pond on each floor has to be found in the first place (encouraging exploration) and when emptied, the player has to risk exploring the next (more difficult) floor if they want additional healing.
Another option is to limit the number of healing items that exist in the game and hide them. This is often seen in survival horror games (I'm specifically thinking of Resident Evil 4 or the first Dead Space).
This creates tension, as healing becomes high risk (health right now may mean less health later). The drawback of this approach is it can make a player avoid risk or combat. Survival horror games address this by making combat unavoidable (which, from an earlier comment, sounds like you are open to).
Another strategy you can use is letting the player know that there will be more items in the next area. Tell them that, for example, "Each level has X healing talismans" (can be explicit dialog or a "You found X/X items" on the map screen).
This way, they know that healing is limited and in order to heal, they have to explore. Also, if they want to heal more, they have to defeat the boss and move on to the next area.
Lastly, you could figure out a way to tie health directly into progression, for example, every 1% of the map filled gives the player 1% health. Obviously, this needs more fleshing out (like, what happens after the player explores 100% of the map?), but if you figure out a mechanic where the only way to heal is to move forward, that would alleviate many of your concerns.

I hope this helped, good luck with your game!

If cowarding during a boss fight is your major problem with auto-regeneration, make the auto-regeneration non-linear: give it a cap of auto-regeneration, and disable it during boss fight (boss fight only, not normal combat).
During normal exploration, make the auto-regeneration fast when your player is in low HP, and it gradually gets slower when HP regenerates (regen_speed = 1/HP). Such a system will make your player keep their HP not to low (hence the purpose of healing), but also not too high (higher HP, lower regen_speed).
If the player is patient enough, or if your dynamic-healing-system is not set correctly, waiting can still be an option. To prevent this, set a max cap for auto-regeneration. For example, auto-regeneration speed is 0/second over 50% HP. You can still heal with potion, health stealing, spells etc. to go beyond 50% HP, but not auto-regeneration.
Lastly, give the boss an aura that disable the auto-regeneration. If it's frustrating for players to start the boss fight with low HP, then give the boss an aura that "heals you to full health, but disable the auto-regeneration", or even with "heals you to full health, disable auto-regen, and revert your HP after the boss fight to pre-boss-fight level".
An explanation for the last aura could be: the boss is fighting your player in the "soul realm", and thus

your soul HP is irrelevant with your character HP, and always starts with 100%
unlike physical body, soul don't heal themselves
after the fight, your soul goes back to the character, and hence your (character) HP will be the same level pre-fight

Doom (2016) actually has a great example of rewarding interesting gameplay with healing through its glory kill system. By rewarding the player with health for getting close to finish off demons, it was able to create a gritty fast-paced in-your-face adrenaline shooter in stark contrast to the cover-based shooters that dominate the market. You could do this same sort of thing, but rewarding the kind of gameplay relevant to your game
If your goal is to drive exploration and platforming, work with that. Create healing triggers based on those types of behaviors. Maybe every time you enter a room you've never been in before, recover something like 25% of your health (or 100% when entering a boss room). Perhaps even have healing for killing an enemy for the first time. You could also put a few frames of invincibility at the beginning of jumps and add a small amount of healing if you get hit within this window (perfect dodge healing).

I'll keep all of this in mind. I've seen some gameplay of Doom 2016, and it never occurred to me that the health is managed expertly in that game.

Missed the timeframe by the looks of it, but will still complete my answer:
Associate self-healing in-combat mainly with the player performing combos. It could be combos that the players are taught or that they are subtly hinted at, through messages of general explanation or by suggesting the combo for a particular situation.
Considering the fact that you want to find a way for gaining health and mana, performing combos could cost mana, but heal you and in order to gain mana the player has to be accurate with their combos. This would also provide a relatively sustainable approach for a player that seems to be always 'in combat', since everything they would need to succeed is all about their skill.
You can always tweak the numbers by:
- making harder combos heal for more
- having higher accuracy on landing combos gives you more mana
- adding synergy between weapons and health/mana (such that if you have a weapon that has Combo Power +10 would give 10% more healing and more mana from combos, or Healing Power +10 only 10% more healing.
- since I saw classes mentioned, you could also have class synergies where, I don't know a Druid gains more Healh innately but has weaker damage to compensate, or a Mage gets more mana out of combos, Archer would have more accuracy on combos, and so on... (Just examples, I know it might be far from your game world.)
This would allow to have levels of difficulty and would mean that, at times, players (and/or their classes) would need some item/strategy in approaching an enemy. It would also require that players get a grasp of the synergies and the advantages and disadvantages of items/classes/combos. You also get to have a more developed world if you wish :)

Dual hit point system
Pillar of Eternity has an interesting approach to it, having two types of hit points, which may help you or give some ideas:
Endurance
Whenever a combat starts, this is a character's hit points for the duration of the combat. It quickly regenerates outside of combat. When the character drops to 0, it is incapacitated for the rest of the fight (other characters can still fight, alternatively it could also mean death for single characters). When a character takes damage, it drains both, Endurance and Health. Healing only affects Endurance and is therefore only relevant in combat.
Health
This is the long term hit points characters have. It is a multitude of Endurance, and the given Endurance in a combat can not exceed the remaining Health of a character. When Health drops to 0, a character dies. Resources have to be used/sacrificed to restore this, and it does not regenerate. Also there are interactions with abilities, like restoring Endurance in a fight, but not Health.

Now as an example, you can have a warrior with 20 maximum Endurance and 100 maximum Health. You go around, fight enemies, lose Health from combat to combat. The benefit is this: The character has something long-term to handle while progressing through the game, which can be more slow and difficult to maintain - but the immediate combat hit points are not drastically low or high in order to balance it.

Possible variations:

Endurance scales with the relative amount of current Health. Meaning as Health drops from fight to fight, the character becomes weaker as well in combat, either by starting with less Endurance or suffering less power.
Similar to Overwatch, an additional layer of hit points could be added, like Armor. Meaning you can allow your character to take some damage in each combat without draining Health.
Another version is Endurance which regenerates in a moderate pace in combat, where Health does not. Effectively it would mean the player must take care not to take too much damage in a too short time-span, but also consider that he won't regenerate hit points forever.
Another honorable mention is World of Warships, where only a part of damage taken can be repaired - be it the last 'n' amount of damage or n% of total damage taken. In essence this is also a dual hit point system. Variance can be had in damage types, meaning some may be better at preventing repair at the cost of other factors.

There's been an isometric (like Fallout 1&2) 'Fallout 76'-like fan made free game available for the last eight years, called Fonline (F-Online; Fallout Online). All you need are the copyrighted data files from F2.
It has a more or less open world, where in instanced encounters you can usually find the two things you need to craft healing powder : a broc flower and a xander root. Maximum carry weight and the time it would take to make too many, prevents abuse and getting stuck because something is too hard.
The flowers and roots aren't hard to find like in Fallout3, you just grind as many as you need until that gets boring and you think you can handle it. All the while, real people and NPCs can come kill you and take all your stuff, but at least you get a little XP for crafting things.
Healing level interest: 9/10.
Agency: 11/10. Because there are several ways to heal yourself; the better ones come at the cost of sacrificing points into non-combat skills such as First Aid, or the ability to craft stimpaks (which require points in Science, a blueprint, and having paid to learn the Chemist profession).
Healing Powder is pretty much useless in combat for even mid-level characters; it's what you use afterwards because they're free.

For a 2D platformer, you need to make (procedurally generated?) places where they can grind what they need if they have to. Otherwise you just die or run back to the save spot like in Castlevania SotN.
If I died because I ran out of powders, that's my fault.... Agency.

If you've never Fonlined, try Reloaded (they can't take your stuff). If you want the real deal, try Fonline2. If you speak Russian or Polish, try Requiem (English is available too though).

You are suggesting that I add in grinding? Because my question deliberately said that grinding is an issue.

@Vakore - "grinding when at low health and not near any healing stations" - there's no healing stations (there is however extremely slow regen). You don't grind at low health, you grind to come prepared. It's up to your IRL skill level to determine how much time you have to waste doing that. It's not really grinding (but there's plenty of that to make guns and whatnot); it's more like, grab a few plants on the way out of the encounter to restock, after spending 5 mins building up a few to get going. It's not like it takes five of each to make one; it's one of each.

I find that boring and bad game design. Now, if trying to get that stuff is fun in some way, at least getting something to do, then I'm O.K. with it. One example(not a perfect one though), is Minecraft. Now, efficiently finding Diamond is really boring, but running through caves, hoping for good stuff while killing things here and there is somewhat fun. This isn't anywhere near a good example, however I haven't played many games where grinding is fun at all, so this is the only example I could come up with.

@Vakore - What makes it fun is that at anytime in an encounter, other people can come kill you and steal everything. Getting the components should be not be benign, but it shouldn't be like a boss fight either. In one iteration of Fonline long ago, if you spent too much time in an encounter, NPCs would start coming, and each wave more difficult. You gotta grab the two plants, gtfo, and get back to work. - It should become dangerous if you take too long. The hair on the back of your neck sticking out is what makes Fonline awesome.

My bad. Didn't know there was any danger going out and getting that stuff.

Have your character eat or drink to heal.  Although they can use it unlimited times, you can limit it behind a long use-time—that is, they are required to stand still for 5+ seconds to heal.  Have the item only heal 10%-25% means they have to use it multiple times.  This would encourage exploring.
As for bosses.  Providing an area to "catch-your-breath" before you start the fight would allow them to heal up before fights.  Bosses could have "quick interrupt" abilities that they use when you try to heal, thus preventing you from cowering/hiding, while some bosses would have long animations or routines, thus making healing a possible strategy in those "windows" (or dealing a little extra damage).
Maybe have artifacts or relics that the hero can switch between that provide different healing benefits.  Such as passive health regen, consumption healing (food), life-steal, etc.  Thus, the player can decide which they prefer to play with.

Another idea:
You generate mana through movement.
You can spend mana (via a button) to heal.
However, while healing, you move at a slower pace (risk enemies catching up) and cannot jump (limited mobility).

Generating mana through movement creates the problem of cowarding, which I want to avoid.

Like FF12, where you spend half your time running in wide circles so everybody can get their mana back?  No thanks.

Pretty much along the lines of the answer @CertainlyNot provided:
Have you ever played Quest64? You regain magic points by moving around in the world, and striking enemies with melee attacks. You obtain limited amounts of healing items, and a majority of the healing in the later parts of the game in between (or during) fights will come from healing spells. Due to the random encounter system in the game, there's an interesting risk-reward to saving mana for fights, or spending it as you gain it to heal up. Perhaps something like this is what you're looking for.


text:
Can a .exe file ported from a program like NW.js or Electron be put console stores?
I'm early in development working on a game in HTML5/JavaScript canvas, and I wondering if porting the game with some HTML/JS to .EXE converter would allowed it to be posted on consoles?
I think it should be possible, since Downwell(though made with an entirely different language) is a .EXE file, and is available on Switch and Playstation.

Probably not.
Ultimately it will depend on what the "converter" tool does, but generally they operate by either:

translating calls from one API to another (generally the OS API). The OS API for consoles is not generally public, so there are generally very few tools that could make such a conversion
embedding a runtime for the original language/technology into the executable along with the original version of the game as data for that runtime; this requires a runtime to be available for the target platform (the consoles), which is often not the case

Certainly it would be possible for you to port your game, but you will likely need to do more legwork than simply running it through a "converter." Unless such a path was already blazed for you, by other developers or the platform vendor, but that depends on the platform and your technology and the licensing agreements you have as a developer for the console.
The ".exe" file format in particular (Portable Executable) is fairly specific to Windows platforms.

The version of Downwell available on the Switch and the PlayStation platforms was likely re-built for the port to those platforms.

What sort of legwork? Would I have to re-create it in another language, or find some application that allows for what I'm trying to do?

@Vakore because console APIs are usually protected behind NDAs, this might not be a question we can answer for you in a public forum. If you're serious about developing for a specific console, you should explore becoming a registered developer for that platform. This will give you access to their API documentation, and often non-public channels for solving development issues closely tied to the console's internals.

@Vakore It really depends. In the worst case scenario, if there is no feasible way to get the tools or runtime for your language to output for or function on the target platform, then yes, rewriting the program entirely may be the only option. Probably you won't need to resort to that, but it still may not be easy work.


text:
Unity - Play animation based on horizontal drag position
What I want to do is somewhat complicated, but I'll try to explain it to the best of my ability. I am using Unity's EventSystems events to detect a drag. When the user drags the object horizontally, I want to play the animation relative to the position of the object.
For example: If the user drags object to position 0.5, I want the animation to only play to time 0.5, and if the user drags back to 0.2, I want the animation to play back to time 0.2
Currently, I do not have any code because I do not know where to begin.

This looks similar to a previous question about seeking animation using x position — did you check that one out to see if its answer helped you? If it didn't, can you edit your post to explain where it went wrong or where you're still stuck?

Due to the luck of more detailed information I’ll have to do some assumptions.
I’m not sure to understand exactly what you mean by “only play to time 0.X”, so I’ll assume you mean that you have one animation clip and you want to set the frame based on the position. Since you did not specify the direction I’ll assume you mean to do it in a 2d space along the X axis. I will consider as if you’ll be using C#.
An animation clip goes from 0 (start) to 1 (end) so you need to normalize the position of your gameObject in order to set the value of animation. Say your object can only be moved between -5 < X < 7 than you would need to normalize this space like so:
float normalizedPosX = (yourObj.position.x + 5) / 12;

Now that you have your position returned as a value between 0 and 1 than you can set your clip to play at the given time. You can do this in different ways depending on the way you’re animating the object, I’ll assume you are using an Animator and will do that by using the following method:
animator.Play(“animationName”, 0, normalizedPosX);

It’s important to set the animation speed to 0 to avoid issues.
Refer: https://docs.unity3d.com/ScriptReference/Animator.Play.html
I hope this can be of help