I have been using Scratch a lot lately for a huge project and there were a couple of thing sthat were bugging me that I thought could be improved:
1. Being able to change the size of each of the sections, especially so that you can have a full screen sized project instead of just a tiny box.
2. Being able to order the sprites box using folders, when you have lots of sprites it is annoying to have to scroll up and down in a tiny box. Eg. People Sprites, Object sprites etc. (similar to that in the sprite pallet)
3. Being able to order individual sprite scripts using folders or sections. Eg. a section for scripts regarding the sprite's movements etc.
I can't think of anything else right now but if anyone else has any suggestions or comments I would love to hear them.
Offline
I have one. Be able to change a sprite's x and y sizes individually.
Offline
I also feel an advantage would be if you could make backgrounds and sprites that were actually bigger than the 480x360. That way maps and scrolling games and projects could be made a lot easier as you would simply be able to move the sprite or background to a new section of the screen allowing you to see the new area of the image.
Offline
Dave911 wrote:
an advantage would be if you could make backgrounds and sprites that were actually bigger than the 480x360.
I absolutely agree with Dave. It would make a lot of things much easier.
Offline
What I would to see in scratch is the ability to hide variables boxes though the use of code block like you ca with sprites and also to put variable boxes in sprites so that the variable boxes become part of the sprite.
Last edited by archmage (2007-07-21 16:05:09)
Offline
archmage wrote:
What I would to see in scratch is the ability to hide varrible boxes and also to put varrible boxes in sprites.
You can hide variables by unchecking the box next to them on the variables list. As for putting them in a sprite, what do you mean?
Offline
Basically, that any command that works with a sprite should work with a variable box. So you can show/hide them during the game, or even move them about.
Offline
I have one: alphanumeric values (aka text ) and a way to display them.
Offline
Also, a way to find a color that a sprite is touching as a variable. With this, drawing programs would be a lot easier in that you can, for example, have the pen color set to The x and y position of a sprite relative to another sprite.
Offline
Dave911 wrote:
I also feel an advantage would be if you could make backgrounds and sprites that were actually bigger than the 480x360.
One more vote for this, especially for sprites. You get very unusual effects when trying to add perspective and your sprite hits the size limits - it really puzzled me the first couple of times it happened since most of the bounding box for the particular sprite I was using was transparent.
Last edited by DrJim (2007-07-19 00:48:23)
Offline
I have a question about adding programmatic control over the variable boxes: would the new blocks be added to the Variables palette (on the left)? Which commands would be most valuable to use with Variables (show, hide, and what else)?
Offline
For the variable boxes the code block I would like to see would be show,hide,goto(x,y).
Also what would be really nice would be if you could change the way the variable boxes look like so you could chose different skins for the boxes or maybe draw your own.
As for where the new block should appear I think they should appear right under the variable they control. So the block "hide score" would appear under the variable "score".
Last edited by archmage (2007-07-21 16:21:38)
Offline
If variables were available as pulldown menus, then the variable pane could be much smaller
<variable>
set <variable> to <value>
show <variable> at <x><y>
set style of <variable> to (one of "named", "unnamed", "slider")
set <variable> slider min <> and max <>
set <variable> format width <n> with <j> decimal places
hide <variable>
Having lots more blocks on the variable pane would not be worth it---it already takes too much scrolling to get to a variable.
Offline
That's why I suggested being able to organize variables and sprites by putting them into folders in the same way you would on you computer. This means if you're using variables regarding a particular sprite for a while you can bring the folder to the top of the list allowing easy access.
I also have a couple more improvement suggestions:
In Scratch - Being able to store information for future use eg. high scores or a players location in a level.
For the website - having a 'remember me' function which can be found on almost any forum. It just means you don't have to login every time.
SB
Last edited by ScipioBellorum (2007-07-23 03:35:00)
Offline
Arrays would be very useful too. I second the "sizes bigger than stage" idea and the "save data for later" idea. The seconf would probably require a few extra database tables, and only be available once a project was uploaded... Unless we decide to make it less kid friendly and add a block that "queries" (too sleepy to come up with a more appropriate word) an external server.
Offline
* For "sizes bigger than the stage" how much bigger would you suggest, ideally?
* I think "save data for later" will be coming soon! (Tammy from the Scratch team worked on it for her recently completed master's thesis --and calls them "shariables").
* The simplicity of the three current variable blocks leads to "aha!" moments for some beginners. Wondering how to add the suggested dynamic variable box display options without making variables looking more complex. Maybe the extra commands could be separated a little and make clearer those are about displaying the variables (whereas the current commands are about the value of the variable)?
I can see the dynamic display options would be useful for the "reporters" too (direction, x position, and the other reporters that have been suggested, e.g., color, costume).
Well, these are my current thoughts/questions (not speaking for the whole Scratch team).
Offline
Has the Scratch team considered making a slightly more advanced version for non-beginners?
When using Squeak, I could start new students off with eToys. As they got comfortable with the early concepts, I allowed them to progress into Squeak.
Scratch could be the same. There are many features that could be added to make Scratch a better programming language to use, but virtually all of these will add complexity to the first few weeks. However, an expert version will allow students to move onto more difficult computer science concepts without adding to the initial learning curve variable.
An expert version could have the new variable blocks, arrays, dynamically created sprites, etc. The variables for different sprites could have accessors. Variables could be more than just numbers but booleans, colors, sprites, etc.
By adding an expert version, it becomes easier for the Scratch user to advance towards Java or C without bogging down the user on Day 1.
Offline
mrgrant: I support your idea to have an advanced Scratch, but not inside Scratch but inside Squeak. I also had many ideas how to improve Scratch, but - like you - I more and more came to the conclusion, that most of it causes confusion to beginners.
So it's better that Scratch stays as it is for beginners (with some minor improvements) and that there was a way for "non-beginners" to profit from their Scratch-Knowhow (and Projects) when changing to the "mother of Scratch".
Squeak - as it is - would be a shock for even most advanced Scratchers, because it is much to complex and powerfull for beginners. But a "Scratch-Squeak", where you can lift up the curtain fom Scratch to the entire Squeak step by step, could be a solution. Perhaps in Scratch-Squeak you could influence your Scratch-Sprites like the robots in http://smallwiki.unibe.ch/botsinc , so you enlarge your programming knowledge starting with the Scratch items you know.
If the students will be interested to learn Java or C++ after entering the Smalltalkworld of Squeak is an other question. The strange thing is, that almost everybody, who has been deep inside Smalltalk, falls in love with it. At the other hand many people don't get inside, cause the borders are too high.
see also:
http://scratch.mit.edu/forums/viewtopic.php?id=414
For getting from Scratch to Squeak see:
http://scratch.mit.edu/projects/Jens/22355
You will have a very fascinating Scratch experience
(Thank you Jens for finding "the Matrix like Redpill" to get to the other side)
Last edited by MartinWollenweber (2007-07-25 12:15:47)
Offline