I can't put up with this anymore...
For example, you could add 3 extra running sprites, or 5 sprites or even 7 sprites!
rollanglewould be limited to a 2D space - The screen's - and the result would look extremely weird if you were facing the loop and the looping player from the front or the back (or you were playing with chasecam off).
But... you did (last sentence)? Then you doubled down (first sentence).I never said nor did that.
That's impossible, no offense.Probably the easiest solution is to just program them in as a 2D mode exclusive and rotate the running sprites accordingly, though I do still feel as though there's potential to the idea of simply reusing rolling sprites for while on 3D slopes. It's not the most elegant solution, but it is (at least on paper) visually consistent and works around the problem of needing to make new sprites. This would probably need to be triggered by some sort of flag to use spin state sprites without actually being in spin state, and could also provide confusion as to whether the player is allowed to touch badniks without taking a hit, but it's a starting point at least.
I'm more concerned with how the loops themselves would need to be programmed, and the potential for this same programming to break sections of levels that don't actually have loops. Would there need to be a special loop flag to tell the game to apply loop physics within a certain area to prevent loop physics from applying when they aren't intended? Then there's always the potential for seemingly unrelated bugs to pop up and things that used to work breaking because of the new code, and it can easily lead to worries of a spaghetti code situation.
I don't get how making new sprites is tedious, I really don't. It takes some time, but I'll be satisfying to see it in action after all.